Re: Wondering about iOS background tasks
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016, at 06:17 PM, William Prothero wrote: > Folks: > My currently finished app needs to run continuously, as it must play a > series of audio files. I found that, in iOS, audio will play when the app > goes to the background, but the app is only completing the current audio > file and the next one isn’t loaded, because the app isn’t really running. > I solved this by setting mobileLockIdleTimer. This keeps the app in the > front and it is what I want. Problem solved. Just FYI, mobileLockIdleTimer will prevent the device locking and turning off the screen, which is a real battery killer. A mobile device can play audio with the screen off for many, many hours. Of course if you actually need the screen on, no problem. On iOS, assuming you have the audio background mode set (in the info.plist), the device doesn't suspend your app while it's still playing audio. It may be the case that the way LiveCode works with audio APIs, or the way you're using them, means you stop playing between tracks for too long, so the system assumes the audio is finished. Might be worth further investigation. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]
Hi Kevin & Richard, Thanks for engaging so positively with this discussion. Let me start by saying that I'm very much on the side of LiveCode succeeding and want to help not just complain from the sidelines. Open source licensing FUD tends to make my blood boil a little, although leaving that aside, I think this from Richard is absolutely the right starting point: > If your project's goal is to share source code the GPL-governed > Community Edition can be a good choice, and for any other goals the > proprietary license as we've always had is available as well. I think where the current licensing interpretation goes wrong is that it effectively creates two completely separate LiveCode communities, one using the Community Edition which has to license everything under the GPL and another using the commercial version which mostly cannot or will not touch anything licensed under the GPL. Given the explicit move towards an extensible architecture and widgets because LiveCode the company cannot possibly cater to the needs of all users, and the community needs to take the product forward in some directions, this seems like a terrible outcome. Unfortunately I can't make it to Edinburgh for the conference this year, otherwise I'd love to take you up on that whiskey-fuelled debate. I have some ideas for how to improve this but I don't want to use the list to build support for anything that might not be workable for the company, so I'll send them separately off-list. I must just comment on the approach to the GPL licensing, which I see as a classic example of the FUD approach that annoys me so much. > A few comments on the statements below though. Firstly, the article Mark > helpfully references is based on USA law. LiveCode is based in the UK. > There isn¹t the same concept of ³fair use² over here, and various other > aspects of copyright law are different. It would be hard to say that the > statements in that article, if correct in the USA (and as I say they > haven¹t been tested) would apply here. The fact the copyright law is different all over the world and the right jurisdiction for a copyright dispute is not always clear is another can of worms entirely. However, most people discuss the GPL in terms of US copyright law because that is largely what it was designed around. The US has one of the broadest copyright protections in the world, almost any copying at all is potentially copyright infringement and fair use is then similarly broadly defined in order to mitigate that. While it's true that in the UK we have fair dealing, which is much narrower than US fair use, the scope of what use is restricted in the first place is much narrower. So, under UK fair dealing, the only infringing use of LiveCode copyright that would likely be allowed is non-commercial research or study. However, UK copyright infringement requires much more substantial copying to take place and case law tends to focus on direct competition in the marketplace for smaller amounts of copying - e.g. if someone's app doesn't directly compete with LiveCode itself and only includes small portions of the code, then it's probably not considered copyright infringement at all. This is because copyright was never intended to prevent people from taking someone else's work and building on it to create new creative works. US copyright law got a bit lost here. From this perspective it's good that LiveCode has so many users in the US, where US copyright law could be applied. I believe German copyright law is much more like US copyright law than UK law too. Within the EU, you can bring a case in any country where the infringing software is accessible I believe - that might be helpful pre-Brexit. :) Simply saying, it's different and hard to say if the same would apply is classic uncertainty and doubt sowing, when the people releasing the code under a certain license should be trying to remove as much uncertainty and doubt amongst users as possible. Particularly when the license itself is as complex and controversial as the GPL. > Secondly, LiveCode is very different from Wordpress. Stacks are executable > binaries that incorporate aspects of the engine. That's even more the case > now when they start to use and include widgets. There isn¹t a good > comparison with other text based languages. I personally doubt our script > only components are GPL, but as I¹ve said this hasn¹t been tested in court > and its not up to me. That LiveCode is different from WordPress is true. Also that a stackfile is more likely to be derivative (or at least subject to copyleft) than a WordPress plugin is also something I'd agree with - as you say - particularly if it includes widgets. However, what I don't like is the "it's not up to me" line. Although interpretation of the law is ultimately down to a judge (or possibly jury), that court test is pretty unlikely to happen. In the absence of an official ruling, it's up to the copyright holder more than anyone else. Only
Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 04:53 PM, Rick Harrison wrote: > Like I said, LC should consider creating their own license then. > > After this little debate, I will never touch any GPL license ever > in the future. In fact, I now consider the community version > of LC to be worthless. I’ve always had an indy type license of > LC which I’m fine with. I’m just now totally disappointed that > I can’t even suggest the community version to my friends to > try out since they wouldn’t be able to use any code generated > by it to be used in a later commercial product after they have > purchased an indy or business license. What a waste. I really don't think there's anything wrong with the GPL for this kind of usage. The issue is with LiveCode (the company) and how they are attempting to interpret its application to their code. To be honest I very much doubt even the FSF and SFLC would support LiveCode's current position. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 03:10 PM, Rick Harrison wrote: > If the GPL license is overly restrictive perhaps LC should consider > releasing the > community version under a license similar to that used by PostgreSQL, > MIT, > or create it’s own Community License. Clearly what they are doing now is > creating a mess that is causing confusion in the marketplace for them. That would be fatal to LiveCode's business. No-one would need a commercial license if the engine was MIT licensed. I don't actually have any problem with the GPL for a dual-licensing model. It's pretty tried and tested. Qt has been doing it for very many years and yet they have never tried to claim any copyright in their users software, they just insist that a program distributed with the GPL version of the Qt libraries is released under a GPL-compatible license. Developers working with the GPL version can create plugins for others and sell them commercially, the user of those plugins would need to get their own commercial license to make use of them in a closed source app. The Qt company folks view this as very positive activity in their ecosystem. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 03:38 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > Mark Wilcox wrote: > > > My concern around LiveCode over-reaching with their derivative > > work claims (which are significantly stronger than those made > > by WordPress and Drupal) > > In what way(s)? OK, it's not wise to pull too hard on this thread, because LiveCode does potentially have an issue with people distributing stackfiles commercially, separate from a copy of the engine. That said, several noteworthy points exist in this regard: 1) First, the Software Freedom Law Centre - which tends to be rather biased in attempting to push copyright law interpretations in a way that strengthen's copyleft licenses - has only given an opinion on WordPress themes, not plugins. That analysis suggested that the PHP code in themes was essentially trivial, just calling a fixed set of APIs to enable the CSS and images to be used in the right places. It's debatable but not unreasonable to suggest that the PHP code in themes is subject to the GPL. The SFLC specifically said that the CSS and images were not subject to the GPL. 2) A core WordPress contributor, Mark Jaquith, publicly stated at the time of the SFLC statement on themes that the same argument applied to plugins as well. He has since reconsidered that opinion and isn't so convinced about themes any more either (see his comment on this blog: https://enriquesthoughts.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/wordpress-is-gpl-must-your-plugin-be-as-well/ - specifically: "Very well argued. My thinking on this matter has evolved since I wrote my post, 3+ years ago. The thing about the GPL is that it is a legal hack. For it to work, it relies on legal concepts like what constitutes a derivative work. And while some plugins could unambiguously be derivative works, I no longer think they must necessarily be so, and I suspect the majority would not be considered derivative works (by a US court, at least). Same goes with themes with the caveat that themes are more likely to contain code lifted from WordPress, so they might veer towards derivation more often than plugins do." Proprietary WordPress plugins are extremely common and largely tolerated. Proprietary themes do still exist but are slightly more frowned upon. 3) Drupal modules/plugins are frequently designed to modify the way that Drupal works. That does create some reasonable case for them being derivative works. The reality is probably that some Drupal plugins are derivative and some are not. 4) LiveCode is basically claiming that anything written in the language is derivative. There is no precedent for this anywhere. Also, large parts of the language itself are not really owned by LiveCode, it has been previously released under more permissive licenses. Effectively by creating a language, you create a new form of expressing creative works. It is almost certainly not possible to copyright everything expressed in a language. Add to this that the language is "English- like" and a lot of the time LiveCode are trying to claim copyright over English words... likely to be laughed out of court. 5) One of the most critical elements in a court's decision on whether or not any use of a copyrighted work is "fair use" is the degree of transformative nature of the work. The LiveCode engine is a general purpose runtime designed to execute arbitrary programs, on its own it doesn't "do" anything. The same broadly applies to any APIs it provides. It would be very easy to argue that creating almost any app that has a useful specific function is highly transformative of the engine code. 6) All is not lost for LiveCode in (5) because distributing a standalone would involve a direct copying of the entire engine, which would very likely override the transformative nature of the use in almost every conceivable case. However, the amount of LiveCode owned copyrightable material in a stackfile is likely very small and the amount in a script- only stack almost non-existent. 7) No-one can know the actual position for certain because this has never been tested in court. > > I'd really hope to see a more enlightened policy here > > Apparently some clarification would be useful. Don't try to force the GPL on stackfiles created with the community edition, only standalones. Encourage dual licensing or permissive licensing. Allow the community edition users to create valuable code that can also benefit commercial users. Even encourage them to dual license and sell that without getting a commercial license (we're not talking about a big market LiveCode would lose out on here). By all means suggest that anyone building a successful business around this practice should buy a license to support LiveCode but don't try to force them to do so with GPL FUD. Frankly, even with a commer
Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]
So the important clause is this one: b) The ability to create and distribute Created Software is intended for You to use with applications You have created or been substantially involved in developing. You are prohibited from using the Licensed Edition to build standalone applications for others where You are not the author of the application, or confer on others the ability to build standalone applications by any means whatsoever. For the avoidance of doubt, You may not use the Licensed Edition to create or distribute Created Software for other users who are using the Community Edition of LiveCode. This clause is intended to prevent You from providing any facility or service which would reduce or eliminate the requirement for other LiveCode users, including users of the Community Edition, to purchase a Licensed Edition to distribute their own Created Software. My interpretation (not professional legal advice) is that if you have a commercial license and you decide to build an open source app released under the GPL, such that community edition users can use the code if they want, then you could take patches from community edition users and as long as they assign copyright you can still release the app on the App Store. The reverse situation, where a community edition user has a GPL app and you as a commercial license holder submit a patch, then offer to take a non-GPL copyright license (or ownership of the copyright) and publish on the App Store is clearly not allowed. Anything in between seems like a grey area and would need clarifying with HQ. I'm not interested in finding GPL loopholes but rather the health of the LiveCode ecosystem and removing FUD from open source licensing in general. My concern around LiveCode over-reaching with their derivative work claims (which are significantly stronger than those made by WordPress and Drupal) is that what constitutes a derivative work under copyright law is not in any way altered by the license applied. So, if the original code in an app written by a community edition user is judged not to be a derivative work, then there is nothing that can be altered in the license to fix that "loophole" in LiveCode's intended licensing scheme. Having the investment of a lifetime license, I'm not keen to see LiveCode basing part of their business model on a very dubious interpretation of copyright law, which also restricts the useful sharing of code between community edition users and commercial license holders. I'd really hope to see a more enlightened policy here. It's much like the question of trying to prevent app piracy. There's no point. The people who would pirate were never going to pay anyway. Give people good reasons to do the right thing and pay, rather than try to scare them into doing so with GPL-related FUD. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]
> If student A wants to assign or sell student B all copyright rights for > his work > for let’s say $1.00 (which is consideration in the legal sense of then > word.) > then student B legally owns all copyright rights to that work. It is > treated > as though it Work for hire is a separate (although related) issue. I completely agree that LiveCode cannot (with copyright law at least) prevent developers doing work for hire using a community license only. Of course morally if someone is making a living doing LiveCode contract development, then they ought to have their own license but if they don't need to publish their work themselves, the GPL doesn't place any restrictions on them. The only reason copyright assignment is required in the collaborative no-fee changing hands case with one license holder is because the GPL is incompatible with the App Store EULA and so whoever has the LiveCode license needs to own the copyright to the rest of the code to be able to distribute on the App Store GPL-free. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]
> So If student A writes down some code on text wrangle and gives it to > student B who (thanks folks) have an indy license, that belongs to student B > and he can dispose of it as he wishes, open sourced or closed source. > In that case it seems to me that it is just a case of confidence between the > group of happy co-contributers, co-thinkers. If student A assigns his copyright in the code he has written to student B, and student B has an Indy license then student B can probably publish on the app store as long as he has written substantial portions of the whole app himself. Student A might not be able to assign all of the copyright in his code to student B (because LiveCode claim it is a derivative work - although I doubt a judge/jury would agree with them, this has not been tested). However, any copyright LiveCode claim in the work is OK because student B already has a license for this anyway. So the GPL is not an issue in this. The issue is the wording of the Indy license, which I was going to check but livecode.com seems to be down. I seem to remember there's an explicit clause against publishing the work of others, unless you've written substantial parts of it yourself. Confidence between co-contributors has no legal basis here. I continue to believe that despite the obvious struggles LiveCode is having getting enough licensing revenue, they're shooting themselves in the foot by trying to over-reach on claiming community users code is a derivative of the engine. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)
> In a former, not so old, enormous thread dealing with the FOSS license > and > trying to understand what it meant in practice, one of the conclusion was > that *only Livecode can dual license*. Nobody else can do that. And Kevin > Miller really pushed hard on that point. Only Livecode can dual license the engine. I think they actually encourage external/widget/library builders to also dual license. The argument Livecode have been making is that someone with a community license only cannot dual license - that basically anything you make with or for Livecode is a derivative work and you need a commercial license of some kind if you want to distribute it under anything other than the GPL. I think they're wrong in this both legally and from a community building perspective but it's not completely black and white. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Summary: Open source, closed source, and the value of code
I've hesitated to wade in on this but I think LiveCode's "official" interpretation of the GPL is wrong and also a mistake. I thought that there was a policy of encouraging those that produce libraries for other developers to also dual-license them - I didn't realise that was only supposed to be allowed for those with a commercial license. I am not a lawyer. However, I did work for an open source foundation (The Symbian Foundation - sadly a very short-lived one) and spent lots of time studying the relevant technical and legal issues and talking to our in house copyright and software licensing expert lawyer. I was the person that wrote the licensing FAQs. Also relevant to what I'm about to say: 1) I've consulted for Intel, Microsoft, Amazon, Google and (also now almost dead but not because of my advice) BlackBerry on developer ecosystem issues. 2) I'm a lifetime license holder from the original open source Kickstarter campaign - I want LiveCode to succeed. 3) I don't actively use LiveCode... just try new bits occasionally. I'm still waiting (since that original Kickstarter) for what has become v8 and hoping it's good! First the legal... I really don't believe the GPL can apply to script only stacks and probably not stackfiles either, just because they were created with the community version. The case for standalones is much stronger and I think LiveCode is pretty safe there. A few points: > The most critical thing to remember is that it is the *intent* of the > GPL that actually matters and not the current text of any particular > version. The simple reason for that is if the GPL is ever tested in > court and the outcome is not favourable or contradicts any > interpretation the FSF have made of it then the FSF will produce a new > version which closes any loopholes which have been exposed in the court > case. Legally it is the text that matters and it's not at all certain that all loopholes can be closed. The FSF are doing something quite ingenious but they're attempting to extend copyright law in a way it was never intended to go. Any license they can come up with is fundamentally constrained by what constitutes a derivative work and what is or is not fair use. > The intent of the GPL is clear - it is fundamentally about building an > ecosystem of software where everyone has the right to contribute to it. > Nothing more, nothing less. It is not an economic force (and thus has > nothing to do with money) it is a creative force. It is about ensuring > that if I receive a piece of software then I also have the right to > modify and adapt that software and distribute any such modifications. Creating and distributing scripts or stackfiles with LiveCode does not in any way interfere with the rights or ability of others to modify, adapt and distribute LiveCode itself. The key distinctions from the Joomla and WordPress plugin scenarios (where there are already plenty of IP lawyers who'd disagree strongly with the FSF) are: 1) The GPL is designed to protect programs, not programming languages. It specifically contains language that excludes "Standard Interfaces" which are in common use amongst a programming language community. Given it's a language that predates the company and has existed under more permissive licenses in the past it'd be hard to claim it as exclusively LiveCode's IP anyway. 2) The PHP code (which is the only part covered by GPL according to the FSF, not CSS or images) in WordPress or Joomla plugins can only by executed in the context of WordPress or Joomla respectively and those are only available under the GPL. In the case of LiveCode scripts/stacks they can be executed in the context of a non-GPL program - the commercial LiveCode engine. > Absolutely every piece of software is derived from a set of files which > can be considered the 'source code' - whether that be actual > source-code, artwork, music, prose, or whatever - which is then > processed using some set of tools to produce something that you can > actually run and use - this is always 100% crystal clear. If it's absolutely 100% crystal clear what the 'source code' is when it comes to the GPL and it includes things like artwork, then why would the FSF even exclude the images and CSS from inclusion in WordPress and Joomla plugins licensing under GPL? It's because the plugin case is a real stretch for the GPL - we're talking original creative work that would be usable in another non-GPL covered environment (see point 2 in the previous section). > The point here is very subtle but I do believe it is happily > covered by the standard notions of 'derivative work' and there is a > simple acid test: could you have written the content of your > script-only-stack text file without using the ideas, notions and > existence of LiveCode? This is not at all the standard notion of 'derivative work' in copyright law. The law in many large countries (including the US, which I believe is LiveCode's biggest market)
Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code
> • What can we/or can't we do with the Open Source version > • Where does the commercial version step in > > So far, the Q/A on live code site that give examples only deals with the > CODE and not the content. The GPL requires that if you distribute your work, you distribute with it everything needed to make it work under a license compatible with the GPL. You also have to be able to modify the code and still have a working version. It is possible to ship a GPL program with proprietary assets, as long as they are not essential to its function. Something some games have done is ship a GPL version with a single working level and assets for other levels remain proprietary. This is usually where someone has cloned a game using the original assets - they say if you own the original you can use theirs with the official assets. This is clearly not in the spirit of the GPL but that kind of workaround does happen. Designs can be registered but they are not subject to copyright law in the same way as text/code is almost globally, so the GPL cannot really say anything definitive about those. IANAL but I suggest you'd have a hard time prosecuting someone for using your design if you'd released open source code that implemented it. There is a similar debate about patents... and much discussion on that in the open source community. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Any LiveCoders who also use Xamarin?
> I'm in an slightly weird situation with a client where they want me to > use > Xamarin instead of LiveCode for a project (for internal 'political' > reasons > as much as anything as far as I can see) - have any of you tried Xamarin > and > if so what did you think of it? I think the important thing to know about Xamarin before getting started is that there are 2 very different ways to do the UI. One is to build a separate UI for each platform and there Xamarin really just provides thin (auto-generated) C# wrappers around the platform UI components - so you have to learn the APIs for each platform. The other is Xamarin.Forms, which is a true cross-platform solution but relatively limited and designed for rapid application development. Xamarin is pretty capable (indeed you can access any native API) but performs quite poorly on Android if you need to call the Android Java APIs a lot. Nothing you'd worry about in an "enterprise" app but probably not advisable for a mass market consumer effort. Depending on what platforms you need to support, whether you can use Forms, and whether or not you already know C#, there can be a pretty steep learning curve. Hope that helps, Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: video conferencing with LiveCode?
Just received a query about an app/service that would allow face-to-face chat... Have any of you managed to do this in LiveCode? And/or could you recommend a service a LiveCode app could hook into? Almost all of the video chat APIs are built on WebRTC these days. That's an open standard implemented in some (but not all - Safari is notably absent) of the major browsers. There are native SDKs for mobile platforms, plugins for older versions of Internet Explorer etc. It's not currently enabled in the embedded browser in LiveCode (for desktop platforms) as far as I know. You certainly could implement WebRTC for LiveCode but it probably makes more sense to do this as a web app. Mark -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: 3 strategic questions I have re iOS development
Hi Bill, 1. Can iOS do audio recording, without Xtras? Not as far as I know. You don't need mergAV though, Monte also has an open source external mergMicrophone. 2. Is it possible for LC to link to iTunes songs. Seems I really only need to determine the directory. I notice there is also a mergeMP extra, but since I’ll just be playing a selected audio file, I wonder if it is needed. On iOS you can't access files belonging to other apps directly. There are APIs for accessing your media library and hence an external is needed. 3. What is the simplest way to store a file in the iOS dropbox (or Google Drive)? Do I need an external for that? Monte to the rescue again for the simplest way with mergDropbox. They have a REST API though, so free and external free option here: http://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=12549 4. Is it possible (or feasible) to store data in the user’s iCloud storage? iCloud drive doesn't have an open web API you could call from LiveCode (or they couldn't keep it to Apple devices only) so you'd definitely need an external or extension for this. It is entirely feasible though. Depending on your timescales and willingness to dig into Apple, Dropbox and/or Google documentation, you could just start with LiveCode 8 and try building some extensions. Otherwise I think for most of this you're still going to need externals. Mark -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Android Intents/iOS Extensions?
On 23 Apr 2015, at 18:43, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: 1. Before I dive in, does anyone here know why this wouldn't work? Custom URLs and Intents are two different systems. The former requires the app you receive data from to know about your custom URL scheme. The same exists on both iOS and Android. Intents on the other hand, in common with the new iOS extensions, allow your app to register as a potential recipient of certain common actions. In both cases you need something different than a URL handler to do the receiving. I don't think Intent handling would be particularly difficult to add to the engine. Extensions on iOS would be more complex as the different types have their own APIs. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Android Intents/iOS Extensions?
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015, at 03:45 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: I'd like to have an app be able to accept data from other programs, like when you click the Share button in an image gallery and a list of programs pops up that can accept images - I'd like mine to be among them. I can see from the iOS and Android docs how to register that support in the manifest, but the APIs for actually receiving the data appear to be lower-level, and I haven't found LiveCode messages for those. Am I dreaming, or have I just overlooked something buried in a Release Note somewhere? Not dreaming. Intents have been around forever on Android but I don't believe LiveCode currently supports receiving them. Extensions are iOS 8+ only, so it's not so surprising that they're not yet supported. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Stacks and livecode server?
I wish Apple's rules were clearer on this so we could end the confusion without our community. Obviously Apple has nothing to say specifically about stacks (a bit too niche) but I think the rules are quite clear. Previously you could not download executable code of any kind unless it was JavaScript downloaded by a WebView. There's then a separate requirement not to significantly change the functionality of the app, which applies whether you are downloading code or not (e.g. something very different cannot be in the original code but not activated until some later time or after checking a certain value on a server). More recently Apple has added the option to download JavaScript to their JavaScriptCore engine, which they exposed a new interface to in iOS7. The reason that Apple give to only allow code downloading to their JavaScript runtimes is security. I think they're much less concerned about what an individual app might do (they can pull it from the store and even remotely remove it from devices) but rather what might happen if a vulnerability was exploited in a widely deployed third party runtime. AFAIK they have no prohibition on downloading binary files, so stack files that contain media but no code, or even behavior-driven stack files that contain no code themselves, would reasonably seem to fit the narrowest definition of their TOS. Yes, you can download bundles of content with no code. The file format doesn't matter. Unity has asset bundles that can contain code on other platforms but are content only on iOS. I'm not sure if a stack has significant advantages over some other format here but I don't see why you shouldn't. But they might even allow stack files that contain code, providing the code doesn't substantially alter the features of the app. That's certainly against the letter of the rules as they stand. Of course Apple can't really know what every app with every possible 3rd party runtime is doing, so you may well get away with it. Who wants to risk getting booted out of the developer program though? Mark -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Tue, Apr 21, 2015, at 01:43 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: jbv wrote: Richard Gaskin wrote: A majority of the projects I'm working on at the moment are standalones that download stacks - depending on what your app does and the needs of its audience, it can be an excellent delivery solution. Same here. But there's a question in my mind for quite a while : as I'm about to develop apps for some professionals who will use them on iPads and iPhones, I was wondering how this follows Apple's rules ? After all, what prevents to submit a first version of the app, and once it's available on the Appstore, to switch to different downloaded stacks, with different functions and content ? Am I missing something ? I wish Apple's rules were clearer on this so we could end the confusion without our community. I haven't read Apple's TOS in a while, and no matter what the rules are today as we learned in 2010 Apple has demonstrated a willingness to change them drastically without warning, so there's no way to know what they'll be tomorrow. So while I can't speak for Apple, that won't stop me from random conjecture: Any script engine can download files containing scripts from a server, thereby enhancing or even altering the behavior of the app. I believe Apple's concern here is merely to make sure the user experience they approve is what end-users get. AFAIK they have no prohibition on downloading binary files, so stack files that contain media but no code, or even behavior-driven stack files that contain no code themselves, would reasonably seem to fit the narrowest definition of their TOS. But they might even allow stack files that contain code, providing the code doesn't substantially alter the features of the app. That is, if you get approval for an app that claims to track football scores, but once it's released it suddenly morphs into a root kit. Apple would probably not want to see that. But if the app merely downloads stack files containing data and UI elements for new teams or other things that don't fundamentally alter the app's purpose or behavior, it would be hard to believe they'd ban it from the app store. Has anyone here had a discussion with Apple on this? Anyone using downloaded stack files as data containers in a way that would seem consistent with Apple's TOS? I'm not sure this issue is as murky as it seems, and may be quite simple. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit
Re: Stacks and livecode server?
On 21 Apr 2015, at 15:09, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: Mark Wilcox wrote: Yes, you can download bundles of content with no code. The file format doesn't matter. Unity has asset bundles that can contain code on other platforms but are content only on iOS. Thanks for that info. How does Unity provide cross-platform compatibility while using two different delivery models? Unity is the sort of cross-platform tool where you have plenty of conditionally compiled bits to deal with platform specifics. :) Actually I think you couldn't deliver the code in asset bundles to iOS with Unity anyway because the bundles contain byte code for the Mono VM, IIRC, and the code is all compiled directly to a native binary on iOS, there's no VM to run it. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LiveNode Server
This is an interesting thread. Let me add a few comments: The CGI / FastCGI thing is a red herring. CGI is slow and so is FastCGI. :) Slighter faster options (e.g. for things like PHP and Python) implement the language runtime via a plugin module to the web server. However, things like Node.js and Go are fast because they don't have Apache or similar in the way. I once saw a presentation by a guy that had built the most carefully optimised (and very popular) HTTP proxy in Python and then discovered that a very simplistic implementation with Node.js was more than an order of magnitude faster. This was because Apache was out of the loop, not because JavaScript is so much faster than Python (it is faster but nowhere near that much). Now Apache and other web servers are really good at serving up files but these days we often want to build APIs. If you've got static files you're better off putting them on Amazon S3 or similar. For getting a chunk of JSON querying a database and spitting some more JSON back the other way you're better off with something architecturally like Node.js. The fact that the whole ecosystem has been forced to do everything asynchronously is a big help. JavaScript and its single threaded nature are not virtues here but not a fatal handicap either. Someone mentioned Meteor.js - that's built on Node.js but they actually use Node Fibers, basically lightweight threads (that have to yield explicitly - no pre-emption) - it makes the code a whole lot more readable. Not having real threads is bad when it comes to processor intensive operations but Node.js got a very long way without them and I think a Node-like LiveCode server could too. It would need to have proper asynchronous I/O everywhere though and that's not trivial from where we are now. It is definitely a project worth pursuing if anyone has the time. The quickest way to get their might be to integrate libevent (as used in Chromium) rather than libuv (as used in Node.js) because it comes with DNS, HTTP and SSL support - you really want all of those in the C/C++ layer, not implemented in LiveCode on top of a raw socket . It might not be the best way overall but alternatives probably involve quite a lot more work. Adding something like blocks in Objective-C (very closure-like), or Node's TAGG, to enable real multi-threaded programming but limited to avoid all the usual thread synchronisation headaches would also be fantastic for LiveCode but another big chunk of work. There didn't seem much point in even looking at any of these things while the engine was undergoing a major architectural overhaul but maybe things are starting to stabilise enough now that it'll make sense to think about them again soon. Mark -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Wed, Apr 8, 2015, at 02:47 PM, Andrew Kluthe wrote: To clarify just a little bit further. The code and objects weren't holding onto memory, the variables used in that code were due to weird scoping. Big chunks of db results, etc that persist after I've already done my business with them and tried to move on. If I can recommend a book on Javascript, I can't speak highly enough of the insights given by JavsScript: the Good Parts from O'Reilly. He provides some history behind some of the design choices in javascript and some of the problems still being worked around today in regards to the bad parts. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Why can't LC do what PencilCase does?
Apple added another exception to the code downloading rule, using JavaScriptCore you can download JavaScript and run it. So it probably is just a WebView but it doesn't have to be. Sent from my iPhone On 14 Apr 2015, at 17:24, Geoff Canyon gcan...@gmail.com wrote: No idea. Their basic projects don't have code -- just a bunch of properties that include things like when this happens, do this, but then you can open the project up and write javascript. Maybe the end result is a specialized web page? I'll experiment more. gc On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Geoff Canyon gcan...@gmail.com wrote: If they can do it, shouldn't LC be able to as well? Or is there something I'm not thinking of? How are they getting past Apple's ban on downloading code??? -- Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. (702) 508-8462 ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LiveNode Server
On 14 Apr 2015, at 18:17, David Bovill david@viral.academy wrote: Yes - thanks for the input Mark. How about having Livecode as a Node extension that we could install with NPM? Is that not a much easier first step? I still would like to get to the bottom of not being fork able means? Unless you want to ban most of the language then you'd still have to replace or integrate the event loop with libuv, which is probably not a small or easy job. If a future LiveCode has a more modular core you might be able to take just the bits you need. It would be fantastic to get add Live code to a Node server with a couple of lines. Particularly for serving dynamically created images. I guess this route will also be possible when we have JavaScript export? I think it would be possible with JavaScript export but that's a very heavyweight solution. Dynamically creating images is the sort of processor intensive task where Node performs badly. It would probably make more sense to have a separate LiveCode executable that can run in another process on another CPU core on the same server. You could signal it via sockets from the Node server, or even just communicate via the file system. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Jim Lambert j...@netrin.com wrote: Mark Wilcox wrote: This is an interesting thread. Indeed it is. Thanks for your informative comments. Jim Lambert ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com javascript:; Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Android local notifications
Android can delay notifications for power saving reasons. As I understand it the more there are from one app and the less the user interacts with them, the more likely they are to be delayed. I think to do what you want more reliably you'd need to use background processing (wake up every 30 seconds, clear the current notification and replace with a new one) and I don't think LiveCode enables you to that yet. Mark Sent from my iPhone On 3 Apr 2015, at 05:27, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.com wrote: Is anyone using local notifications on Android? I need to know more about how they work and I can't find much online about it. I need to send notifications every half hour for a 5-minute period, 30 seconds apart. I have this working in theory; notifications are scheduled correctly and mostly fire on time until the user opens the app, when I cancel any pending ones. First issue: often some alerts do not trigger at all, or trigger sporadically, or are significantly delayed (up to 2 minutes late.) A 5-minute interval will have 10 notifications if the user does not respond. Sometimes fewer icons appear in the status bar than audio alerts were heard. Sometimes more icons appear than audio alerts. Second issue: I would like a way to replace an existing notification icon with the next one (every 30 seconds) so that there is only one at a time, but I don't see how we can do that. If the phone is sleeping or the app is backgrounded we have no control, so to overcome that I need to schedule all 10 alerts in a block while the app is frontmost. When those come due they all stack up in the notification bar until the user opens the app (when I cancel them all.) So briefly, I need: Alerts to trigger on time, every 30 seconds, with no delay A subsequent alert should replace an existing alert The timely delivery is more important than the multiple icons in the status bar. Does anyone know how Android prioritizes these? What are the rules for the default priority, which I assume is what we've got. There are no other apps running on the phone, and it has no cell service. It is intended to be a dedicated device for this one app, so there shouldn't be anything else running except for normal OS operations. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: mobile app stores - personal v. corporate customers
Is it possible to have an app in both the Apple store and the Android store which functions in this way. Yes. Apple and Google are not trying to make money out of your B2B sales. An ideal solution might be to have a free app with some minimal functionality that lets you unlock the main content/functions with an IAP or a company login. Alternatively it is possible to create two versions and go the paid download route for the consumer version. Then in the B2B version you can have almost everything behind a login in a free app. Apple prefer it if the app does something without a login. The only major restriction is that you can't link to a website where a company could sign up and pay for your app. Hope that helps, Mark Sent from my iPhone On 29 Mar 2015, at 00:33, Bernard Devlin bdrun...@gmail.com wrote: I haven an idea for an app which would function in 2 different ways. 1. users pay to download the app, and the app writes no data back to a server 2. companies would pay to provide the app free to their clients/staff, and data would be transferred between the company and the end user (the end user does not pay to download the app) Is it possible to have an app in both the Apple store and the Android store which functions in this way. In the 2nd situation, the company would pay a fixed fee for the provision of the app to their end users. Somehow the Apple/Android stores are going to want payment for this situation (which is not the pay per deployment model). I'd be grateful if anyone has any ideas about how such things work. Regards Bernard ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LiveCode 8 Library Component: MLT Video Editing Framework
Hi David, Module is a generic term with a specific meaning in MLT (and slightly different meanings in lots of other projects). Dependencies and how they're resolved tends to be platform specific. C code is just code and can be packaged up to be linked in a static or dynamic way. You have to research each platform (and in some cases project) separately to understand how things are managed. I'd love to give some high level article pointers but I've never read any (although some probably exist). I think most people learn the details by trying to build these things for themselves, or port them to new platforms. LiveCode widget vs. shell command - a widget will be much more integrated. It depends what the library does as to whether this just adds convenience and performance, or makes the previously impossible possible. Sorry those are very generic answers but you're opening up a very big topic and I'm typing on a phone. :) Mark Sent from my iPhone On 22 Mar 2015, at 07:58, David Bovill david@viral.academy wrote: Thanks so much for the reply Mark. I would like to understand the difference between module and dependent code sufficiently to be able to look at C code and its documentation and understand this issue. When a package manager (like brew) lists a bunch of things it is going to install is there a way to know what sort of dependency is being fetched? Other questions (related to the one above) I'd like to get a handle on - specifically in this area of wrap-able command line tools: what are the advantages to wrapping a library in a widget over creating a library in livescript that makes shell calls? * is there a speed advantage (its usually only one shell call out per library handler) Taking MLT as an example - it uses / depends on FFMPEG. My assumption is that this is a module, and that if it were installed on my machine with an appropriate package manager then would my MLT widget library would be able to use FFMPEG? Any pointers on reading / how to gain this level of knowledge would be greatly appreciated. On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 at 06:40, Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk wrote: The framework is free of dependencies and probably quite easy to wrap as a component for LiveCode 8. However, on it's own it doesn't do anything. There are lots of modules that make it incredibly powerful but they do have dependencies, some of them huge, like Qt. The video rendering is via SDL, so it's not immediately clear how you'd integrate that with the rest of your LiveCode app. It might be necessary to replace that module. If you wanted to write video editing tools in LiveCode this might be a good place to start. For other AV related functionality it'd probably be better to go for simpler single purpose libraries. Mark Sent from my iPhone On 21 Mar 2015, at 17:16, David Bovill david@viral.academy wrote: This framework is great and written in C - http://www.mltframework.org/bin/view/MLT/Framework It's the basis for most of the best cross platform video editors. On OSX I can recommend http://www.shotcut.org/ Does that look like a good candidate for a new LiveCode 8 library component? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LiveCode 8 Library Component: MLT Video Editing Framework
The framework is free of dependencies and probably quite easy to wrap as a component for LiveCode 8. However, on it's own it doesn't do anything. There are lots of modules that make it incredibly powerful but they do have dependencies, some of them huge, like Qt. The video rendering is via SDL, so it's not immediately clear how you'd integrate that with the rest of your LiveCode app. It might be necessary to replace that module. If you wanted to write video editing tools in LiveCode this might be a good place to start. For other AV related functionality it'd probably be better to go for simpler single purpose libraries. Mark Sent from my iPhone On 21 Mar 2015, at 17:16, David Bovill david@viral.academy wrote: This framework is great and written in C - http://www.mltframework.org/bin/view/MLT/Framework It's the basis for most of the best cross platform video editors. On OSX I can recommend http://www.shotcut.org/ Does that look like a good candidate for a new LiveCode 8 library component? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: [semi-OT] Distributing apps for iOs outside iTunes
I've used Ad Hoc Distribution for this a few times before - it can become a bit of a pain because employees join and people get new devices - you have to manage updates to the provisioning profile manually - more often than you'd think. A better option is if you can get the client to join the iOS Developer Enterprise Program: https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/enterprise/ It's $299/year but then you can get Enterprise distribution profiles/ certificates. These don't have any device restrictions at all, it's just part of Apple's rules that they're only allowed for internal use within an Enterprise. This removes all the issues with collecting UDIDs and keeping provisioning profiles updated. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Wed, Mar 18, 2015, at 06:36 AM, j...@souslelogo.com wrote: Hi list One of my clients needs an app for his employees that will run on their iphones or itabs. Those employees are very few (less than 10) and no one else will be interested in the app because it's related to a very specific activity, therefore using iTunes doesn't seem relevant. I took a look at Apple's distribution options, and the Ad Hoc Distribution looks like the way to go, but I was wondering if anyone had already use it, or if there was any better option... Thanks in advance jbv ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: [semi-OT] Distributing apps for iOs outside iTunes
I have some points to consider here having done it both ways a few times: 1) I'd definitely have them give you sufficient permissions to manage the certificates, keys and profiles yourself in their account. You still do everything apart from sign-up, pay and sign (click through) contracts with Apple, the account is just in their name. 2) The enterprise account's extra $200/year should be saved in the cost of your time not managing profile updates and issuing new builds when devices change (maybe not for a lot less than 10 people, but still the difference must be almost nothing in the total development cost). 3) It also removes any delay for a new employee/device - the enterprise signed build can be installed automatically without going through the whole UDID collection, provisioning profile update and rebuild process. This is what enterprise accounts are for. Not having to explain why it doesn't work on new devices (which is after all rather technical and all down to Apple) is also of value. Overall a better customer experience. 4) If you build up a decent sized client base over time you will struggle with the 100 device limit, even in multiple standard developer accounts (I have access to 4 accounts at the moment, 2 of them are almost at the limit). I've mostly used ad-hoc builds for demos for potential new clients - even that can fill up your device slots over time. 5) In theory you can remove old devices but do you want your clients to have to tell you when they retire old ones? Will they remember anyway? Analytics can no longer tell you which UDIDs are still in use, since developer access got cut off some time ago. Technically ad-hoc distribution shouldn't be used to deliver to clients for internal builds but I can confirm that Apple shows no signs of caring about enforcing that. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Wed, Mar 18, 2015, at 12:06 PM, Mike Kerner wrote: I take this the other way: I want more control, not less. I take it personally when something I build isn't freaking awesome. I consider other enterprises' employees to be part of my team when I write something for them. I am their IT guy, so the last thing I want to do is take a chance on someone over there dropping the ball and making something break, that I then have to clean up, especially when they're under the gun. Spoiling them rotten is my privilege. They will be in one of my profiles. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Matthias Rebbe | M-R-D matthias_livecode_150...@m-r-d.de wrote: Am 18.03.2015 um 12:16 schrieb Colin Holgate colinholg...@gmail.com: I would do a mixed approach. Get your client to join at $99 per year, and to have you as a team member. They would include at least one of your devices in their list, so you can test installs, and you would be able to build for up to 100 devices. If they only need about 10, that would cover quite a few employee and device changes. And if i remember right every year you can reset that list of devices. This would allow you to delete non active devices and it increases the number of possible test devices again. On Mar 18, 2015, at 6:23 AM, Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk wrote: I've used Ad Hoc Distribution for this a few times before - it can become a bit of a pain because employees join and people get new devices - you have to manage updates to the provisioning profile manually - more often than you'd think. A better option is if you can get the client to join the iOS Developer Enterprise Program: https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/enterprise/ It's $299/year but then you can get Enterprise distribution profiles/ certificates. These don't have any device restrictions at all, it's just part of Apple's rules that they're only allowed for internal use within an Enterprise. This removes all the issues with collecting UDIDs and keeping provisioning profiles updated. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Wed, Mar 18, 2015, at 06:36 AM, j...@souslelogo.com wrote: Hi list One of my clients needs an app for his employees that will run on their iphones or itabs. Those employees are very few (less than 10) and no one else will be interested in the app because it's related to a very specific activity, therefore using iTunes doesn't seem relevant. I took a look at Apple's distribution options, and the Ad Hoc Distribution looks like the way to go, but I was wondering if anyone had already use it, or if there was any better option... Thanks in advance jbv ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use
Re: [semi-OT] Distributing apps for iOs outside iTunes
I've used ad-hoc provisioning as a free and simple per device licensing mechanism before but it doesn't offer any protection. Devices get lost and stolen and you can't remote kill the app via the provisioning mechanism. Anything with a real data security requirement has to have a user authentication system. Whether you or the client manages that is up to them and their IT capabilities. Too easy to disagree while talking in generalities though. Every client app is different. My main point for this thread is that the enterprise developer account is a major convenience and worth considering. I once had a large client that got one just for internal test builds, the app was for consumers and releases were on the App Store. Even then it saved a lot of time and hassle. Sent from my iPhone On 18 Mar 2015, at 16:24, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.com wrote: The reason for explicitly provisioning (and therefore multiple developer ID's), and banning a device is that you get an extra layer of protection for your corporate clients from having just anyone with their random device get access to the corporate app. That also means when someone leaves you have the ability to explicitly cut them off from updates. Sure, you can hope that the corporate IT department locks them out, as well, but this way you have an incentive to communicate with them at least once per year about who has access. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk wrote: I have some points to consider here having done it both ways a few times: 1) I'd definitely have them give you sufficient permissions to manage the certificates, keys and profiles yourself in their account. You still do everything apart from sign-up, pay and sign (click through) contracts with Apple, the account is just in their name. 2) The enterprise account's extra $200/year should be saved in the cost of your time not managing profile updates and issuing new builds when devices change (maybe not for a lot less than 10 people, but still the difference must be almost nothing in the total development cost). 3) It also removes any delay for a new employee/device - the enterprise signed build can be installed automatically without going through the whole UDID collection, provisioning profile update and rebuild process. This is what enterprise accounts are for. Not having to explain why it doesn't work on new devices (which is after all rather technical and all down to Apple) is also of value. Overall a better customer experience. 4) If you build up a decent sized client base over time you will struggle with the 100 device limit, even in multiple standard developer accounts (I have access to 4 accounts at the moment, 2 of them are almost at the limit). I've mostly used ad-hoc builds for demos for potential new clients - even that can fill up your device slots over time. 5) In theory you can remove old devices but do you want your clients to have to tell you when they retire old ones? Will they remember anyway? Analytics can no longer tell you which UDIDs are still in use, since developer access got cut off some time ago. Technically ad-hoc distribution shouldn't be used to deliver to clients for internal builds but I can confirm that Apple shows no signs of caring about enforcing that. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Wed, Mar 18, 2015, at 12:06 PM, Mike Kerner wrote: I take this the other way: I want more control, not less. I take it personally when something I build isn't freaking awesome. I consider other enterprises' employees to be part of my team when I write something for them. I am their IT guy, so the last thing I want to do is take a chance on someone over there dropping the ball and making something break, that I then have to clean up, especially when they're under the gun. Spoiling them rotten is my privilege. They will be in one of my profiles. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Matthias Rebbe | M-R-D matthias_livecode_150...@m-r-d.de wrote: Am 18.03.2015 um 12:16 schrieb Colin Holgate colinholg...@gmail.com : I would do a mixed approach. Get your client to join at $99 per year, and to have you as a team member. They would include at least one of your devices in their list, so you can test installs, and you would be able to build for up to 100 devices. If they only need about 10, that would cover quite a few employee and device changes. And if i remember right every year you can reset that list of devices. This would allow you to delete non active devices and it increases the number of possible test devices again. On Mar 18, 2015, at 6:23 AM, Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk wrote: I've used Ad Hoc Distribution for this a few times before - it can become a bit of a pain because employees join and people get new devices - you have to manage updates to the provisioning profile manually - more often than you'd
Re: Mobile cloud storage
So most folks have either iCloud, Goggle Drive, Dropbox, or OwnCloud, and using those sure beats building a complex storage backend for simple apps. Does our community have yet a library for allowing the user to pick which common storage system they have and an API for reading/writing to it? Apple made a generic solution for this on iOS and OS X. Document Provider Extensions (OK, new OS versions only). https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documentation/General/Conceptual/ExtensibilityPG/FileProvider.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014214-CH18-SW1 If you want to read and write files from/to cloud storage then there's single interface and the device only shows providers that the user has installed/configured. The latter part you obviously can't get without being the OS provider and having providers write Extensions to tell the system they offer file storage. For Apple platforms at least it would make sense to mimic the interface as far as possible though, assuming you don't just want to wrap what they've already done. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Confusion about making 64 bit binaries for submission
OK so I am trying to submit a new iOS app and of course it needs to be 64 bit now. So I prepared the standalone with 7.0.2 RC 1 but ran into all sorts of minimum OS compatibility issues with the app loader in Xcode. Waited and then tried again with 7.0.2 RC 2 but it now doesn't seem to generate a 64 bit binary - at least that is what app loader says. Any ideas? Is it me? Which version of Xcode are you using? As far as I know, if you're using LiveCode 7.0.2 and Xcode 6.1 upwards then you can't not try to build for the 64-bit architecture as part of your binary. There's a neat little command line tool called lipo which lets you see which architectures are included in your binary if you want to double check. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Building apps for iOS 7?
I¹m using an enterprise license so I¹m not going through the app store and what I really want to do is to roll back to an earlier version of Xcode so that I can build my app using some pre iOS 8 compatible externals. What problem are you running into with the build using incompatible externals? Is it a missing 64-bit architecture? A suitable combination of old LiveCode and old Xcode should work. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Building apps for iOS 7?
Just as a general FYI - you can create a minimal app skeleton with the wizard in Xcode and check how far back through versions it'll let you build. You can almost always go a couple of major versions back. So, although the latest Xcode comes with the 8.1 SDK you can set the deployment target as far back as 6.0. If it won't work there's some other reason, not the Xcode update. Provisioning profiles is a common cause. It might be nice if the LiveCode standalone builder had a little more intelligence built-in there, rather than allowing me to select anything back to 4.3. Unless you're not building for the App Store it's a bit of lost cause trying to support older versions than the latest official SDK allows - Apple always come up with some new submission requirement that means you need to use the new SDK sooner or later. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Mon, Feb 2, 2015, at 02:21 PM, Dave Kilroy wrote: Hi Terry - I also can build for iOS7 using LC 6.6.5 and Xcode 6.1.1. I believe LC 6.6.5 is the oldest version you can use with Xcode 6.1.1 so you will get errors if you try to use earlier versions. Could it be that you recently created new provisioning profiles (or updated existing ones)? If so I would check on the development portal to make sure that nothing has been added to them that means they won't work in iOS7 (their payment thingie for example...) Dave - Some are born coders, some achieve coding, and some have coding thrust upon them. - William Shakespeare Hugh Senior -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Building-apps-for-iOS-7-tp4688368p4688371.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: which iPhone...
If you don't have the appropriate launch screen / launch images for the iPhone 6/6+ then your app gets run at iPhone 5 size and scaled up. Sent from my iPhone On 10 Nov 2014, at 22:16, John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk wrote: Now I am a little confused ... xCode 6.0, OSX 10.9.5, LC 7.0, iOS 8 simulator Let me be a little pedantic here in my explanation. I have prepared a stack at a size of 320 x 480... It has one button with the following script... on mouseUp answer the screenRect of this stack end mouseUp If I choose Hardware Devices iPhone 4s running in the simulator returns 0,0,320,480 If I choose Hardware Devices iPhone 5s running in the simulator returns 0,0,320,568 but... If I choose Hardware Devices iPhone 6 running in the simulator returns 0,0,320,568 It is at this point that I expected to see 0,0,375,667... I am more than a little confused! Dixie From: gerry.or...@gmail.com Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:27:31 + Subject: Re: which iPhone... To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Randy's code gives me a screen rect of 0,0,375,667 on an iOS 8 iPhone 6 simulator. Those are the correct values (remember for the iPhone 6 and 6+ you need to multiply by 2x and 3x respectively). The code also works accurately on a 4s and 5s simulator. Thanks Randy! Gerry On Tue Nov 11 2014 at 5:03:48 AM Randy Hengst iowahen...@mac.com wrote: Xcode 5.1, OSX 10.8.5, LC6.5, iOS 7.1 Simulator... this code in StartUp shows correct dimensions... I don't have iOS 8 simulator on this mac. on startUp answer (word 1 of the machine) iphoneSetAllowedOrientations landscape left,landscape right --portrait,portrait upside down,landscape left,landscape right switch (word 1 of the machine) case iPod case iPhone set the fullscreenmode of this stack to exactFit --letterbox--noScale -- exactFit --letterbox --empty -- --exactfit --showAll break end switch answer the ScreenRect end startUp On Nov 10, 2014, at 11:35 AM, John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk wrote: Subject: Re: which iPhone... From: jac...@hyperactivesw.com Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 11:12:32 -0600 To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Does it work if you omit working and just ask for the screenrect? Hi Jacque... No it doesn't... Dixie ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: 64-bit App Store requirement
On 23 Oct 2014, at 14:45, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: You may just be ahead of your time. After all, it seem unlikely Apple will be shipping an iOS device that has more than 4 GB RAM, and even if they did, with PAE it would only be logically necessary if they expected individual apps to need more than 4 GB. True, it's more efficient to use native addressing, and having committed to 64-bit gates it'll certainly help - but only very modestly, unlikely significant enough to end-users to make it a requirement. So what could be driving this? I believe this is primarily driven by the desire not to need more RAM in iOS devices. Supporting both 32 64-bit apps on the same device means having the system frameworks for both in memory at the same time. When they can drop 32-bit app support in new devices it'll save on firmware update size and build, release and test work at Apple. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: iPhone kiosk
Obviously I don't know the details but if you're going to run in a single app mode, then complete control of the phone while your app is running is possible without a jailbreak - it's just control whilst in Springboard and other people's apps you need to jailbreak for. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Mon, Aug 25, 2014, at 02:49 PM, Richard Miller wrote: The hardware device controls an iPhone remotely through bluetooth... not a process Apple supports. This isn't a game controller. It is complete control of the phone. On 8/25/14, 5:26 PM, Mark Wilcox wrote: I'm no jailbreaking expert but as I understood it, the issue is not that you can't get new versions of iOS quickly but that you can't install older firmware to a device unless you have already jailbroken it. You can't overwrite legitimate firmware with anything but newer legitimate firmware because the firmware itself includes version and signature checking. What's so special about this custom hardware that the device needs to be jailbroken? Why can't it go down the MFi route? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: iPhone kiosk
Jailbreaking is a pain - do you really need it? I ask because iOS has a kiosk mode - look up Guided Access. If you have to jailbreak you always get new devices with the latest firmware and then have to wait for someone to create a new jailbreak. If you retain control/ownership of the devices then you can use an enterprise developer account for production and manage updates with a Mobile Device/Application Management solution - MDM can also trigger single app mode (not sure how this is different from Guided Access) remotely. There are third party solutions and Apple provides a basic free one (called Profile Manager) that ships as part of OS X Server (which you can have a copy of for free with an iOS developer account). Updating apps by simply downloading a new stackfile is entirely doable in an iOS device - as stated by others, it's just against the app store rules. That doesn't let you update LiveCode itself though, in case you ever need that. I think the key consideration around updates is how the app will get updated if it is always running. For that I think you probably need a MDM solution so you can release the device from single app mode, update it and put it back into single app mode. Of course the devil is in the details but I recommend looking into all of the legitimate solutions before going down the jailbreak route. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Mon, Aug 25, 2014, at 06:45 AM, Richard Miller wrote: Hoping someone here knows the answer to this. I realize it's an unusual situation. I am setting up a jail-broken iPhone with a LC app. This phone will be set to boot directly into the LC app. The phone will only ever be used for this one purpose. Think of it as an iPhone kiosk. Users will not be able to access any functions on the phone outside of the app. Once I have completed all the development work on the first phone, I want to clone this phone to other iPhones so that each is an exact copy. Is that possible? Can I create an iTunes backup of the first phone and then use that backup to restore it to new iPhones? Second question is in regards to distributing and updating the app. The app itself is not to be sold through the App Store. My business model is based on distributing these iPhones (with the app pre-installed). Again, the phone will never be used for any purpose outside of my app. The phone will not be used to make calls, but it does need to access the internet. Most importantly, my app needs to be kept updated. Is there some way to automatically update the app (even through a jail-broken means)? I imagine larger corporations have exclusive apps that are not distributed publicly and are kept updated. How does that work? Thanks, Richard Miller ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: iPhone kiosk
I'm no jailbreaking expert but as I understood it, the issue is not that you can't get new versions of iOS quickly but that you can't install older firmware to a device unless you have already jailbroken it. You can't overwrite legitimate firmware with anything but newer legitimate firmware because the firmware itself includes version and signature checking. What's so special about this custom hardware that the device needs to be jailbroken? Why can't it go down the MFi route? -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Mon, Aug 25, 2014, at 12:55 PM, Richard Miller wrote: Jailbreaking is a pain, but I see no way around it. We use a custom hardware add-on that can only communicate to the iPhone if it is jailbroken. As far as jailbreaking new devices is concerned, the idea is to maintain a cloned image of an earlier jailbroken device and then restore that image to all new iPhones... overwriting any new OS upgrades it may have shipped with. We're not concerned about having access to typical new iOS upgrades. If a new OS comes out that has a significant new feature in it for us, we'd have to wait to use that feature until a jailbreak was available. But that wait doesn't effect our ongoing business. Richard ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Matching funding
The matched funding is in addition to the total. I don't know the exact source but assume it's some government scheme, matched funding seems to be the preferred method in the UK. It's the main thing that makes the campaign worthwhile. They pre-sell licences people would need anyway at a slight discount but get nearly double the normal amount thanks to the matching. Mark On 19 Jul 2014 02:22, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote: Reading the HTML5 FAQs in today's newsletter, there's mention of matching funds. I may have missed it in prior announcements but I didn't know about that. Any info available on where those matching funds will come form, if they are part of the $395k or in addition to, etc? Pete lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com Home of lcStackBrowser http://www.lcsql.com/lcstackbrowser.html and SQLiteAdmin http://www.lcsql.com/sqliteadmin.html ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: [OT] SWIFT
http://swift-lang.org/main/ This is the wrong Swift. Yes, Apple gave their new programming language the same name as an existing one. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: CEF browser - how to allow cross origin requests using the file:// protocol?
Now, if you use a server and http://, Keynote uses Ajax and transitions work fine. This means I need to remove the JSONP option and tell the CEF browser somehow to allow cross origin requests using the file:// protocol. With Chrome this can be achieved by using a -–allow-file-access-from-files command line switch. Does anybody know how to set this flag for the CEF browser in LiveCode? I had a very quick look at the code and I don't think it can be done without a change to the engine. One way to do it would be to implement: CefApp::OnBeforeCommandLineProcessing() In revbrowser/src/cefbrowser.cpp It could be a fixed command line argument that is added if no-one is concerned about the security implications, otherwise some new command in LiveCode that lets you add to this argument list before you create a new browser object. The second option would obviously be much more flexible. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: WebRTC support and Chromium Embedded Framework in LiveCode
I assume CEF doesn't build the WebRTC support in the Chromium project by default because it has extra dependencies on the audio stack. I guess LiveCode could include such support if it wanted. Does LiveCode plan to bundle CEF on Android? Given the built-in web view in Android is already based on Chromium that would seem like a lot of bloat for little gain. For iOS it's against the App Store rules to include your own browser engine (no downloadable code execution allowed) and not even technically possible to ship the V8 JavaScript engine (because you can't mark memory both writable and executable - so can't ship your own JIT compiler). As far as I know Safari doesn't yet support WebRTC on Mac OS or iOS. Even when it does, there's not yet any guarantee that it will have a common video codec with other implementations because the standards people can't agree on a mandatory one. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 02:40 AM, David Bovill wrote: Thanks Alejandro - I just tested and on OSX with revBrowserOpenCEF (which is Chrome 32) - I get a score of 472 rather than 503 for Chrome 32. It looks like webRTC is not available on Chrome 32 version in CEF for OSX. I'm not sure about Android and iOS versions yet? On 1 July 2014 00:13, Alejandro Tejada capellan2...@gmail.com wrote: According to http://html5test.com/ this new Chromium Embedded Framework is identified as Chrome 31 and scores 450 from 555 points. http://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=89t=20501 -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/WebRTC-support-and-Chromium-Embedded-Framework-in-LiveCode-tp4680734p4680747.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: WebRTC support and Chromium Embedded Framework in LiveCode
I'm getting the impression that the LiveCode roadmap is primarily user demand driven, so there isn't really a long term strategy apart from keep the platform relevant and grow the user base. :) If you really want something relatively simple like this in the roadmap I think pledging for the new campaign with a Premium (or maybe Pro) license and asking them to do it sooner rather than later is the best way forward! Alternatively it's simple enough that you could contract someone to do it after all the refactoring is sorted for significantly less than the cost of a Premium license. I think the main issue with doing this for mobile platforms is backwards compatibility. On Android the WebView completely changed (to a modern Chromium base from an old WebKit base) in one of the recent releases (can't remember which 4.x version) - making sure it works identically on both might be tricky - Android has always had a simple method for doing this though. On iOS this was only doable via fake URL load requests in the WebView before iOS 7, then iOS 7 added an almost completely undocumented and slightly cumbersome way of doing it properly. Now iOS 8 has added a new WKWebView with a much nicer way of doing it (and much better JavaScript performance!). So, it's going to be cheaper and easier to do via an external/extension if you only care about newer platform versions but to get it into the engine where it belongs means supporting all the platform versions that LiveCode does. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 09:28 AM, David Bovill wrote: Ah yes - I see the Chromium Embedded framework is really desktop only - I missed that. I'd like to down what the long term strategy regards browser controls cross mobile and desktop is. For instance *revBrowserAddJavaScriptHandler* is for now CEF specific - is the plan to add this to mobile platforms? On 1 July 2014 14:08, Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk wrote: For iOS it's against the App Store rules to include your own browser engine (no downloadable code execution allowed) and not even technically possible to ship the V8 JavaScript engine (because you can't mark memory both writable and executable - so can't ship your own JIT compiler). As far as I know Safari doesn't yet support WebRTC on Mac OS or iOS. Even when it does, there's not yet any guarantee that it will have a common video codec with other implementations because the standards people can't agree on a mandatory one. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: We're Funding LiveCode For the Web
My concern is that it have local, in-memory SQLite wherever it happens to be running, whether that be the browser or the server. -- Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. It's running in the browser, with the LiveCode engine compiled to JavaScript. Compiling SQLite to JavaScript and running it locally in the browser is not a great option - how will you reliably persist the data and keep decent performance? Not that there aren't JavaScript based DB solutions that use local file storage. Sadly the web standards folks messed up here. Web SQL was effectively killed because Mozilla and Microsoft refused to implement it. IndexedDB looks like the option that everyone eventually agreed on but it's not implemented everywhere yet. I suspect it will be fairly widespread by the time the HTML5 deployment option is complete though... -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Compile IOS Externals
Hi, This external is only a couple of lines of code - I very much doubt it doesn't compile, you probably have a linking problem. If you post the errors then maybe it'll be easy to solve and it might also provide valuable learning for other externals. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk On Thu, Jun 19, 2014, at 04:58 PM, Nakia Brewer wrote: Hi, In the past (Before xCode5) I have been able to compile and use the following external without issue but in xCode5 I get errors that are way beyond my understanding. https://github.com/trevordevore/iosclipboard Would any of the external builders perhaps be interested in getting this to compile for a fee? COPYRIGHT / DISCLAIMER: This message and/or including attached files may contain confidential proprietary or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from using, reproducing, disclosing or distributing the information contained in this email without authorisation from WesTrac. If you have received this message in error please contact WesTrac on +61 8 9377 9444. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus, data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment. We reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communications. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: IOS 8 and xCode
Does the current or coming IDE support IOS 8? If it does support IOS 8, will it also address any content that can be used where Swift Programming is used? This means is the IDE going to allow Swift scripting in the IDE? Swift is not a scripting language, it is a compiled language like Objective-C. You can't use Objective-C in the IDE and you won't be able to use Swift. It will be possible to write extensions (externals) in Swift but because the engine is C++ they will need a standard C or Objective-C wrapper to be able to talk to the engine. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: iOS reference document - iOSBrowser
1. Does anyone know how i might find this iOS reference document? [1]https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/uikit/referenc e/UIWebView_Class/Reference/Reference.html 2. Does one of the newer versions of LC for iOS contain an even better browser, one with more features or capability? No, UIWebView has not changed significantly (until iOS 8) and the App Store rules prevent you from shipping your own browser engine. I believe LiveCode is going to be shipping it's own WebKit version on other platforms though. 3. Is there a stack somewhere that demonstrates features of a newer iOS browser? No, although there is a new WKWebView class in iOS 8 that allows significantly more interaction between the app and the web content. There are of course no official plans to support it in LiveCode yet. -- Mark Wilcox m...@sorcery-ltd.co.uk References 1. https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/uikit/reference/UIWebView_Class/Reference/Reference.html ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LC, Android video control
I'm not aware of any external that gives you low-level video access on Android. I think it would be possible to create such an external but - Android externals are a rather new feature, Monte did a lot of the work to enable them (I'm not sure if anyone else has built one yet?) and lower level video control / editing only appeared in Android version 4.0. To support anything earlier than that you'd have to do it all on the CPU with the Android FFmpeg port rather than the hardware video decoders. Guaranteeing it would work across a very wide range of Android devices would be tough due to the hardware fragmentation. Some new Android devices don't have the stock Movie Studio app included - makes me suspicious. Probably OK on anything with a Qualcomm chip though. RunRev are supposed to be doing an overhaul of multimedia as part of the Kickstarter goals... not sure what's in the requirements for that. Mark On Thursday, 1 May 2014, 12:11, Richard Miller w...@together.net wrote: Is it possible to have frame-by-frame video control through LC on an Android phone? As well, to be able to jump to any point in a video? Thanks, Richard Miller ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LC, IOS 7 and UIKeyCommand
Hi Richard, Sorry for a rather late reply to this. I#39;m not sure what level of answer you#39;re looking for. You#39;ve found the appropriate incantations in Objective-C. They need to be used in an external, or someone would need to contribute this feature to the engine. Given the issue noted in your link with sub-classing UIApplication, this would be better contributed if RunRev will accept such a contribution. It could be done in an external but you#39;d have to go the more complex route of detecting dialogs and setting your class back to first responder manually when they#39;re dismissed. If contributing to the engine or writing an external is outside your comfort zone then you could either ask RunRev to add it to their list of features to be implemented and wait, or pay someone to implement it for you. Usually I think Monte would pick this sort of request up very quickly. If he#39;s not available/interested then I have a Bluetooth keyboard and the necessary skills. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Enterprise iOS License Distribution...
2. I’m also wondering if there is something special that needs to be done to the iOS app after LiveCode creates the iOS app. The iOS appears to have a app extension and not an ipa extension. Also, I’m guessing the iOS app hast to be compressed before changing the file extension to ipa otherwise it results in just the folder with it’s iOS app components. I hope this makes sense. Bingo! A .app file does not necessarily have the necessary signature but assuming LiveCode was set up properly to build the standalone with your Enterprise distribution profile then it should. Simply compress the .app file with finder and change the extension from .zip to .ipa manually. Then it should work with Profile Manager. I have no idea why LiveCode doesn#39;t finish the job here. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Enterprise iOS License Distribution...
Profile Manager includes Mobile Device Management for iOS devices. It's definitely the right way to be doing this. No idea why it's not recognising the file but I thought I'd add that an app signed for enterprise distribution can be installed directly on ANY iOS device, not just through MDM. So check your .ipa file installs locally before trying to upload to Profile Manager, there might be something wrong with it. Mark On 9 Apr 2014 19:59, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.com wrote: I don't know anything about Profile Manager, so take this with a grain of salt. But my guess is that it only recognizes Mac apps, and a iOS app is a different beast entirely and requires a different kind of installation. Also, as far as I know, Apple prohibits remote installation on iOS devices, so I doubt a bulk install is possible. It's a walled garden. There are a few utilities that allow you to create ad-hoc installations where the files are stored on a web site or server. My AirLaunch is one, Monte has mergTestApp which integrates with the TestFlight web site, and there are other web sites out there too. To install an iOS app you need an html file that points to a special manifest file, which in turn initiates the download of the actual app to the device. On 4/8/14, 6:19 PM, JOHN PATTEN wrote: Thought I’d ask just in case somebody else has experienced this situation. We have a new Apple Enterprise iOS license for distributing iOS apps built with LiveCode. I have configured the our workstation with the proper profiles, first creating a development profile and making sure that we could test apps out on a iPad. Everything in that department works fine. I then installed our distribution profile and created the same app with the Enterprise distribution profile. In our school district we are using Profile Manager (part of OS X Mavs Server) to manage apps we purchase and, eventually, apps we create. Profile Manager works fine and we can easily push out apps we puchase over the air. However, when trying to add an app we developed with our Enterprise profile, it spits back: Filetype Not Supported. The file you selected is not supported. Please choose a different file. Anybody have any experience with this specific situation? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: The status of 6.5.1
There's not enough time to test every pre-existing feature. There needs to be an automated monkey machine to run each new version through. There is, they've been writing one for a while now. The only quibble I have here is that I foresaw and asked about this potential quality issue doing such a major rewrite without a comprehensive suite of automated tests. Kevin responded (on the Kickstarter comments page) to say that they had one - turns out it was somewhat embryonic rather than comprehensive at that stage. Having met several of the team at RunRev Live last year I'm confident they'll sort it out though. It's just going to take a bit longer than originally advertised. On Monday, 20 January 2014, 9:58, Matthias Rebbe matthias_livecode_150...@m-r-d.de wrote: Same here: I used mTropolis and Director for a long time before i switched to Revolution in 2005. But i do not miss them at all. Maybe mTropolis a little bit. ;) Am 20.01.2014 um 03:41 schrieb Earthednet-wp proth...@earthednet.org: Tom, I'm a Director escapee too and I can't tell you how refreshing it is to be working with livecode now. Bill William Prothero http://es.earthednet.org On Jan 19, 2014, at 4:40 PM, tbodine lvhd...@gmail.com wrote: So far, I find the resolution independence and fullscreen features of 6.5.1 are really great time savers for me. I've seen a few bugs, too, but, wow, these new features will save me months of work. Coming from the Adobe-ruled Director universe, I have to say, Richmond, you don't know how good you have it with RunRev. With Adobe, upgrades are *years apart* and always deliver disappointment by breaking existing features, introducing new complications and driving third-party developers out of the market. At least with RR you know another update isn't far off, the road map is not a secret, there is frequent communication with the developer community, and there's a solid commitment to the product and its community. I don't see anything but a determined, good faith effort by RunRev. Progress is an uneven, bumpy journey. RR has committed to a lot of progress, so my attitude is buckle up! I'm going to do what I can to help. (Bug reports. Testing. Minimal whining.) For those who don't like the ride, you can always stick with your last favorite version and hunker down. My two cents. Tom Bodine -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/The-status-of-6-5-1-tp4674797p4674838.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode Matthias Rebbe Tel: +49 5741 31 +49 160 5504462 eMail: matthias underscore livecode underscore 150811 at m dash r dash d dot de ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: New Year Roadmap
Funny how it is the Roadmap from last year. As someone who bought a lifetime license in the Kickstarter based on the promised new functionality, I really wasn't expecting them to deliver in the originally stated timeframe - I have too much experience with complex software projects for that. We do appear to be further behind than even my pessimistic guesses though. At present rates I'm expecting to see the Kickstarter stretch goal feature set completed sometime this summer. :) Given that I went for the lifetime license this really isn't a big deal for me, but if I'd gone for 1 or 3 years then I'd be slightly miffed. On Friday, 17 January 2014, 21:12, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote: Really? Funny how it is the Roadmap from last year. Naughty; where's the 'top story' ? What would be much more useful is the 'Roadmap' with the items that have been completed ticked off, and a more definite idea of a timescale (GANTT chart?) as to when it is envisaged the other goals and stretch goals are likely to be completed. Richmond. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: [OT] web training video delivery - how do YOU do it?
Hi Phil, I don't deliver web training but I do have some experience with getting videos to work across a lot of browsers. The only way of delivering videos to old browsers and maintaining your sanity is Flash. Even then, Adobe dropped support for IE6 last year, so the user has to have an old version already installed and if they've got a dud there's not a lot you can do to upgrade it. You'd definitely need to check if they really are using IE6 and if the browsers haven't been locked down to prevent plugin installs. YouTube isn't a magic solution either unfortunately - they dropped support for IE6 back in 2010 and IE7 in 2012. Google have actually stopped supporting IE8 in some of their apps (although not YouTube). I was going to suggest Brightcove instead because they serve video for a lot of dinosaur corporate environments but I checked and they ended IE6 7 support early this year: http://support.brightcove.com/en/video-cloud/docs/customer-communication-about-end-life-ie6-and-ie7 Sadly the reason government clients are interested in web-based solutions in the first place is the same reason it's nearly impossible to guarantee a consistent experience - locked down and inflexible IT policy. I don't think you really can do much better than mediaelement.js as a general purpose solution. If you can find out from the IT folks a specific minimum Flash version, for example, that's installed on all PCs then you might have a chance to do better. If they really are still using IE6 without the chance to upgrade then I fear you have no chance - even Microsoft is trying to kill IE6: http://www.ie6countdown.com/ Probably not the advice you were looking for but I hope it helps avoid too much searching for a magic bullet. Mark From: Phil Davis rev...@pdslabs.net To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com; LiveCode Developer List livecode-...@lists.runrev.com Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2013, 21:44 Subject: [OT] web training video delivery - how do YOU do it? Hi Friends, If your clients or company deliver web training that includes videos, I would greatly appreciate any insight you can share from your experience. My largest client delivers web training to his customers. His entire content development / deployment / management system is built with Livecode, and one app uses FFMPEG to render desktop movies (mostly QT) for the web (mp4, ogv, webm). That app then uploads content to an on-rev server. The server has code that serves the content and collects the training results. (To be clear, the training content is a set of web pages containing text, video, images and sometimes audio. It's interactive. We don't upload a single monolithic 30-minute training video, but rather a training title may have any number of smaller videos that are available on various pages in the training.) My client now has a new opportunity to enter US state and fed government agencies in a big way. Problem is, they often use IE6/7/8 and are not open to change. As you may know, these are THE most problematic browsers in existence. We have found it extremely difficult to make all movies work all the time in all (IE) browsers. (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, later IE browsers are not a problem.) We're very concerned that we'll blow this opportunity if we can't deliver a rock-solid web training experience, specifically the video part. Do your clients or company have a great way of delivering web training that includes videos that always work every time, even in old IEs? If so, how do you do it? (Maybe your JS/CSS/HTML is better than ours.) We use John Dyer's mediaelement.js http://mediaelementjs.com/ as the core of our web video playback. We're considering ditching our in-house movie rendering process and using a media delivery service (like YouTube) for videos. Then the training movies would be uploaded to that service, and movies would be served from their server. We would use their embedded links and THEY would handle browser compatibility. At least that's how we're thinking about it. What am I missing? Have you ever done this? What has your experience been? I'm stretching the limits of approved list subject matter with this, but here I am anyway. As you can imagine, there is a LOT resting on the way we go forward in this. Thanks so much for your time and feedback. Feel free to contact me off-list as well. -- Phil Davis p...@pdslabs.net 503-307-4363 mobile ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: A Text file format for LiveCode
Personally I think there may be some value in having the default developer view of a stack as a set of (mostly) text files. There would then be a tool that does a lot of what lcVCS does which turns that into a binary stack format for runtime size and performance - a lot of languages compile things in that way. However, note that the Live part of LiveCode is made faster by this almost direct manipulation of the binary that the engine interprets rather than having an intermediate step. So, if the lcVCS route can be made to work robustly then optimising for coding rather than optimising for serialising for version control seems like a pretty good tradeoff. Mark From: David Bovill da...@scimatch.org To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Monday, 7 October 2013, 14:18 Subject: Re: A Text file format for LiveCode On 6 October 2013 23:46, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: On 07/10/2013, at 8:52 AM, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: The format is probably pretty obvious, too . . . begin button myBtn owner: card buttonville of stack buttonland type: pushbutton label: My Favorite button loc: 823, 445 width: 92 height: 39 script: on mouseup do something awesome end mouseup end button myBtn How would you represent multi-dimensional properties in this format? You can use folders. I structure things as follows - toplevel we have an array based representation of stacks, under which you can choose to export this to either XML, JSON or my preferred representation text and folder based. These don;t get around the problems Monte points out - but an established practice of using handers to define a default state which is triggered on each save / export to vcs works though it is time consuming to create each handler - better is to avoid using those features in stacks. Monte - I thought there was some new stuff in the developer releases for creating IDs of the sort you advocate? Can you update us? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Updating iOS apps
FWIW, you can also use TestFlight with an Enterprise developer account (I think it's limited to 1000 users) but an Enterprise distribution certificate frees you from the hassle of managing device IDs - for an extra $200/year it's almost certainly worth it for avoiding the pain of the provisioning portal on a regular basis. Mark From: Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 2 October 2013, 16:36 Subject: Re: Updating iOS apps TestFlight (not testApp - sorry) also lets the users pull the app update, so it's like using the app store without using the app store. As he mentioned, if you're going to be at 99 users or under, you can just put their devices on your developer profile and and testFlight will put the relevant profile on their device so they can execute your app. Once you're over 99, you need to purchase an Enterprise license, to do your own private distribution. On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.comwrote: Monte has a tool that integrates with testApp, which lets me notify my users of updates. Then I give the users a certain period of time before the app locks them out if they don't update. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: On 02/10/2013, at 7:23 AM, Andrew Kluthe and...@ctech.me wrote: How is ad-hoc deployment handled on iOS with livecode? I recall something on the list from some time ago about being able to deploy test code to devices via dropbox. If it's not on the app store (you have an enterprise program or are using a development profile) then yes you can do this fine. However, you would still need to handle new versions of the engine or externals so in the end it might be simpler to use a service like test flight to rapidly notify of updates and distribute your app. The advantage of having some form of auto-updater though is that hotfixes can be automatically integrated rather than requiring users to do anything. Another option might be to disable your app until users install the latest version although if you're updating as frequently as you mention that would get pretty annoying... You possibly want some combination of both. Cheers -- Monte Goulding M E R Goulding - software development services mergExt - There's an external for that! ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode -- On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth On the second day, God created the oceans. On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, and did a little diving. And God said, This is good. -- On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth On the second day, God created the oceans. On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, and did a little diving. And God said, This is good. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: iOS 7 / Xcode 5 and the status bar.
John's right - on iOS 7 apps are full screen by default with a translucent status bar floating on top. This happens to native apps when you build under the iOS 7 SDK too. It's a platform change that apps should adapt to. Since the status bar is translucent it matters what goes underneath, so there's no good default for LiveCode to implement to hide this platform change. Note that this platform change also affects screenshots and default.png (the splash image - which if you're using it properly is not a splash screen at all but something that makes it look like your app is loaded almost instantly and about to fill in data - this does somewhat depend on the type of app, e.g. games almost all use it as a splash screen). The splash image now includes the status bar area. Mark From: John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Tuesday, 1 October 2013, 8:08 Subject: RE: iOS 7 / Xcode 5 and the status bar. Ralph... The top of the card could be the top of the device under iOS6 if the status bar was hidden... when set to translucent the top of the card is the top of the device... I don't see it as a bug. Dixie From: rdim...@evergreeninfo.net To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Subject: iOS 7 / Xcode 5 and the status bar. Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 20:56:38 -0400 On an iPad 2 running iOS 7 with LC 6.6.2rc1, the top of the card is now the top of the device. The first 20 pixels(iPad 2) of the card is in the status bar area. I think this was introduced by integrating Xcode 5 into LC not from the update to the 6.1.2 engine from the 6.1.1 engine. Old apps that were linked using 6.1.1 running on a iOS 7 device do not exhibit this behavior. I see this as a bug. The items that are different have a * preceding them. iOS 6.1 *the rect of this stack==0,20,768,1024 *the rect of this card==0,0,768,1004 the screenRect==0,0,768,1024 *the working screenRect==0,20,768,1024 *the effective working screenRect==0,20,768,1024 the top of this card==0 *the bottom of this card==1004 iOS 7 *the rect of this stack==0,0,768,1024 *the rect of this card==0,0,768,1024 the screenRect==0,0,768,1024 *the working screenRect==0,0,768,1024 *the effective working screenRect==0,0,768,1024 the top of this card==0 *the bottom of this card==1024 LC 6.1.2 rc1 OSX 10.8.5 Xcode 5, 4.6.3, 4.5.2, 4.4.1, 4.2 Arm7 build. Ralph DiMola IT Director Evergreen Information Services rdim...@evergreeninfo.net ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Pitch shifting Audio
To pitch shift audio in real-time here is the basis for a cross-platform external: http://www.surina.net/soundtouch/ This could probably be integrated alone quite neatly. Pulling the audio out of a video to be able to pitch shift it in real-time could be done with ffmpeg (you need to decode it before you can pitch shift), although on mobile platforms that is extremely inefficient vs using system frameworks that take advantage of dedicated hardware. If you need this you might as well be replacing LiveCode's multimedia support. When the platform refresh is complete it might be feasible to extend LiveCode in this direction but I wouldn't recommend anyone attempt it at the moment. Unless this requirement is just a small part of a bigger project that LiveCode is very well suited for then I'd be inclined to agree that it's the wrong tool for the job. Mark Beat Cornaz b.cor...@gmx.net wrote: Hello to everyone, Is there a way to pitch-shift audio without changing the speed (playback rate) in real time in LC? And is there a way to get the audio of a movie player to be pitch-shifted without changing the speed (playback rate) in real time? If this is not possible, is there an external that can do the job? Thanks a lot, Beat Cornaz ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Facebook authorisation on iOS
Hi Gerry, I don't know how Andre Garcia's library works but assume it's not using an external that wraps the Facebook SDK for iOS. From painful personal experience I'd advise against any attempt to access Facebook other than through the official SDKs or platform native interfaces (e.g. for sharing on iOS). I'd also suggest avoiding using the web/JavaScript SDK unless you're building a web app. Facebook has a move fast and break things culture and they regularly break their APIs. When you're using an official SDK (even wrapped) you share the pain with everyone else and it usually gets fixed very quickly. If you've got some community generated solution with a minimal number of users then you're almost on your own and every time it breaks you need to rush through an update to your app to fix it. Not even slightly fun. My experience came through trying to integrate with Facebook via native apps on platforms they don't provide official SDKs for - it was a mandatory requirement from the client and I didn't have a choice. If you have any other choice - take it. Either go down the external route or just don't use Facebook auth. FWIW, this is almost unique to Facebook, we didn't have similar problems integrating with other services. Hope that helps, Mark From: Gerry Orkin gerry.or...@gmail.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com; LiveCode Developer List livecode-...@lists.runrev.com Sent: Tuesday, 10 September 2013, 1:50 Subject: Facebook authorisation on iOS Hi all As you know lots of sites and apps use Facebook authentication to verify user identities. I'm trying to get that working in iOS using Andre Garcia's Facebook library. I can get the FB sign on screen but the app always crashes after I enter my log in details. I'm having no luck debugging the problem :( Has anyone got this to work? Is it work persisting? Cheers Gerry ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Implications of DOJ vs Apple for developers?
Publishers could set their price, they just couldn't set it any lower than was available in Apple's store. Apple very clearly did collude with publishers to try to set some minimum pricing for ebooks, which is most certainly against the law. The DoJ is bonkers because the minimum pricing they were setting was below that typically available in the near-monopoly Amazon store. Apple was colluding with publishers to try to introduce competition to the market and break some of Amazon's monopoly power. In that regard, the situation seems similar to that of any content provider - I suspect we'll see similar rules across the board as others start wondering why ebook publishers can bypass the store but they can't. As I understood the proposed change, it's not ebook publishers or ebook apps that are being singled out for special treatment, but ebook stores/readers. So Amazon's Kindle app (for example) would be able to link to its own store for purchasing ebooks but an individual ebook app wouldn't be able to use an external payment mechanism to download additional chapters. I very much doubt this particular change will happen because it is entirely outside the scope of the original price fixing issue but also draws an obvious parallel to other media (e.g. music) where Apple has massively more pricing power and market share than they do in ebooks. On the general topic of allowing external payments for in-app purchase, Google has just changed it's policies to be much more in line with Apple. Content on Google Play has to use Google Play's in-app billing service as the method of payment except: * where payment is primarily for physical goods or services (e.g. buying movie tickets, or buying a publication where the price also includes a hard copy subscription); or * where payment is for digital content or goods that may be consumed outside of the application itself (e.g. buying songs that can be played on other music players). The first point is almost identical to the app store (except Apple doesn't allow you to use their in-app purchase for physical goods at all). The second point is similar to Apple's allowing external content purchases and subscriptions for apps, except Apple doesn't allow that payment to occur within the app, nor link to an external website where it can happen. Obviously the second point allows for ebook purchases in e.g. the Kindle app to go through Amazon. Apple's basic premise is that if you use their store for discovery or as the only channel for delivering your service then you can pay them a sales commission. Since the app store is truly terrible as a discovery mechanism (for all but a handful of apps at the top) and most services need to be on both iOS and Android now, this issue seems to get much more attention than it deserves. The only condition that's occasionally tricky to comply with is providing some content for those that haven't paid, so the app isn't just a login box. Since Apple clearly doesn't have a monopoly in smartphones (or even tablets) I don't see why any kind of regulator should get involved. Apple is just being a bit greedy. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Sprite Kit, Box2D, Performance and LiveCode's Approach to Game Coding
I wrote an extensive response to your original mail on this thread but sadly lost it to rubbish Yahoo! webmail + the 15k limit on the list. (FWIW, JavaScript is not 50 times slower than C++ but with modern JS engines like Google's v8 more like 5 times + that amazing Citadel demo with the unreal engine is compiled from C++ to asm.js WebGL and the asm.js is then ahead of time compiled to native code in the browser before it is run - IIRC it only works in Firefox nightlies and is sadly unlikely to be supported in browsers other than Firefox anytime soon). Can't a coding platform be blazing-fast yet having an excellent IDE, built on an event-driven foundation and supporting multiple platforms? The answer here is yes (try coding for Qt in C++ using their excellent Qt Creator IDE) but you also want the convenience of a high-level dynamic language and in that case the answer is no. Even in the article you linked, the author had to give up the convenience of Objective-C and drop down to C++ to get that level of optimisation. The good news is you can also drop down into C++ from LiveCode, so if you really need to optimise some algorithm to that level, you can. The other thing to note is that hardware advances also bail us out, making more and more possible with inefficient tools - the iPhone 5 is about 10 times faster than the iPhone 3G used in that article. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Sprite Kit, Box2D, Performance and LiveCode's Approach to Game Coding
Box2d is definitely fun to play with but it's really only good for games that inherently need physics simulation - Angry Birds is a good example. (BTW, box2d is also the physics engine in Sprite Kit, which is basically Apple's cocos2d Lite - since the cocos2d developers started focussing on the cross-platform C++ cocos2d-x rather than the Apple only Objective-C original.) Here's a recent article on why you don't want to use a physics engine for a lot of 2D games: http://www.learn-cocos2d.com/2013/08/physics-engine-platformer-terrible-idea/ I've personally been having lots of similar issues with Unity3D building some micro-games recently. The games involve some magic and thus objects that don't obey physics. Their interaction with objects that do obey physics needs quite a lot of tweaking. Also physics simulation at high performance on a mobile device is quite CPU intensive, so they turn down the accuracy (this is much more of a problem in 3D than 2D) - that results in lots of tweaks just to avoid simple things like falling objects going straight through the floor! All in all I think it's debatable whether I'd have saved time simply ignoring the physics engine and coding my own limited physics for the little parts of it I needed. You get a lot working quickly by plugging into the physics engine but it then takes ages to polish it to an acceptable quality. I few years ago I ported a successful side scrolling platform game from iOS (cocos2d) to Qt. It did all of its own physics for gravity and collisions and that probably added up to significantly less than 100 lines of code - all very simple maths and not optimised. That still ran comfortably at 60fps on the early iPhones and iPod Touches. I'm not saying box2d isn't a good thing to have for LiveCode, I'm just suggesting we shouldn't expect it to turn the platform into a gaming powerhouse. :) Mark From: John Craig j...@splash21.com To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 21 August 2013, 12:26 Subject: Re: Sprite Kit, Box2D, Performance and LiveCode's Approach to Game Coding I'm also interested in creating games with LiveCode and looking forward to box2d integration. I've been checking out Corona and (more recently) - Unity (3D), to familiarize myself with physics stuff. It makes a massive difference having a physics engine taking care of collisions, gravity, etc. I assume that box2d performance with LiveCode will be on a par with other platforms using the same engine, so it will really open up a lot of possibilities :D The following Unity demo only required a couple of hundred lines of code, since all the physics was taken care of, so I'm really looking forward to seeing what LiveCode is capable of in the coming months. http://youtu.be/XuA5xbsdx_M Since Unity has a web player, you can have a play around with the demo here; http://splash21.com/Buggy/ ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: community vs commercial for internal distribution of iOS apps
It's distribution not use that counts in the GPL. If you put the download behind a login then you could possibly argue that the distribution was entirely internal, however, students are not generally under the control of an organisation in the same way that employees are - a student could legitimately argue that you gave them the binary, therefore you have to give them the source code too. For a company with an internal distribution, employees or sub-contractors are unlikely to raise the same objection. Even if you did make source code available internally, you can contractually prevent employees and sub-contractors from distributing it further, whatever the license says. With students I don't think that's the case. Note that the GPL never forces you to publish your source code publicly when distribution is limited, just that everyone who gets the binary also gets the source and is free to pass it on to others. From: Terry Judd terry.j...@unimelb.edu.au To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Tuesday, 20 August 2013, 13:56 Subject: Re: community vs commercial for internal distribution of iOS apps On 20/08/2013, at 8:31 PM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/20/2013 06:32 AM, Terry Judd wrote: I've been looking at the FAQs, and in particular this question... Can you give me some examples of where I do and don't need a commercial license? ... and I'm still not exactly clear on where I stand. My situation is that I am distributing apps to students within my institution using an iOS Enterprise Developer license. The apps are hosted on one of our sites and are can be downloaded by anyone but they will only work for our students as they require users to logon securely through the uni's authentication system. I've been distributing these up to now using a commercial license but I'm wondering whether this is necessary. The pertinent question seems to be - do I need to distribute the source code to students to be within the terms of the community license? I have a feeling that you have to make the source code available NOT only to the students in your institution, but to anyone who downloads your apps; whether they have a logon account or not. I suspect you're right. This means that other institutions could pinch your app. If this fusses you, you have to buy the commercial version. I'm about to renew anyway but was curious about what my obligations were. Cheers, Terry... Richmond. Terry... Dr Terry Judd Senior Lecturer in Medical Education Medical Education Unit Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry Health Sciences The University of Melbourne ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: community vs commercial for internal distribution of iOS apps
Just for clarify : if i look in the binary of a standalone created by the community edition, i can see all the scripts aka the source code, no ? Yes, there's no encryption or password protection on community edition stacks but the GPL does not accept being able to extract the code in some way from the binary as sufficient (you can reverse engineer/dis-assemble almost any binary you like). You have to give them the code in such a form that they can easily re-build a modified binary for themselves. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Getting the Public IP address
I am trying to establish the User's public IP address. The Scripter's Scrapbook has several methods, all of which return the same result and all of which seem to return a local IP address (e.g. put the hostnametoaddress of the hostname into myIP). I am getting 192.168.2.2 (local) instead of the required 85.210.89.23 (public). It must be possible as a google search on 'My IP address' displays it. You didn't say anything about what you want that IP address for. Make sure you do really want the public IP address as there are lots of situations where this concept isn't very useful. The IP address for the device that is running the app is almost certainly a local network address. In most homes the public IP address belongs to your router and your PC, Mac or mobile device knows nothing about it. As such something like Mark's: put URL http://qery.us/iptest.php; Is the only sane way to go about getting your public address. Note that in some scenarios there can also be a proxy at your company or ISP between you and the server at the other end, so this address may not even belong exclusively to you, it's just the address that a remote server needs to send packets back to for them to be routed to you. In most situations, without explicit routes set up, there's no way for a remote computer to initiate contact with you. For example in some large corporate environments all traffic is routed through a central monitoring system, so this kind of web lookup results in an address that might not even be in the same country as you. Also, depending on the robustness of your required solution, you may not want to rely on a 3rd party service to return your address to you. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: MobGui and Resolution Indipendence
Then I wonder how to deal with the MIT licence if I have to deploy a commercial app. The MIT license tells you - you have to provide a copy of the copyright notice and permission statement (essentially a copy of the license file) with all copies of the software, although I'm sure Monte isn't planning to sue anyone who doesn't. There is nothing that says you have to make a copy of the license highly visible or easy to access, so you could just add it to the app bundle as an external file. However, generally accepted practice is to either include the license in an about box in your app if you have one, or add it to the end of your EULA on the App Store if you don't. Then, to sumarize, at the present time, what is the best practice to create a little commercial app for the iOS devices ? There isn't really an ideal solution at the moment, so it depends on your current and expected future requirements. How long is the app likely to be maintained? Might you ever want to build it for Android? - build an app with several different layouts taylored according the iphoneUseDeviceResolution This works for iOS only but as an approach doesn't scale to Android where there are so many more resolutions to deal with. The native iOS development community have been strongly encouraged towards auto-layout recently which suggests there may be some additional resolutions on the way for iOS too. - installingMobGui plugin and let this software to manage the resolution issues I believe the future of this plugin will remain uncertain until RunRev have released (or at least revealed much more detail on) their resolution independence and native platform themes functionality. It would work for now but you *might* need to switch away from it in the future. - using mApp framework This appears to be a viable long term solution across all platforms but as you say it doesn't really have any documentation yet, so there will be a greater learning curve. - wait for the resolution independence be integrated in LiveCode If you have no time pressure then this is the easiest option but I wouldn't count on having something complete and stable in the next few months. It's also not yet clear that this will be sufficient for most apps or if you'll still need something like mApp to manage layouts dynamically - from what I've read about the feature so far it looks like the latter may be the case. Hope that helps, Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: linking for armv7 failed...
Are you using any externals that might not have been built for armv7? From: John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 7 August 2013, 9:48 Subject: linking for armv7 failed... I am in the middle of trying to upload an ipad app to itunes... To cover what I have showing in the livecode prefrences under 'mobile support' I have xcode 4.4.1, 4.52, 4.6, 4.6.2, 4.6.3 Available SDK's 5.1, 6.0, 6.1 Available simulators 5.1, 6.0, 6.1 I have my app identifier, development provisioning profile, distribution profile I can build and run in the simulator... I can build a standalone and run it on an iPad... but I can only build the standalone with the 'build for' setting set to arm6... universal or arm7 doesn't seem to want to know. I tried using the 'application loader' to load the 'distribution build' set to arm6, but it quiclky tells me that the armv7 component is missing... When I try to build for armv7 the error message displayed, reads :- There was an error while saving the standalone application linking for armv7 failed with arm-apple-darwin10-llvm-g++-4.2: /private/var/folders/z9/zhgc043x3cxbg5955vch0mbwgn/T/TemporaryItems/tmp.554.AdxUp0vO: No such file or directory Anyone know where I am going wrong ? Dixie ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: revOnline and Open Source
Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: It's nice when you guys get involved. I totally agree with the logic behind what you said by the way. Unfortunately this stuff isn't as logical as we often assume it is ;-) I also think the law in this area is bonkers and agree with the more common sense view of intellectual property Richmond and Heather are describing. However, it's also worth considering that something published without a license may not belong to the person who published it. It's also possible that someone would deliberately remove or change someone else's license but that would likely place most/all of the liability for subsequent infringement on them. If you're building a business around some code, or building apps for others who are, then you need to be certain you have the right to distribute (and usually modify) all of the code you use. The flip side to that is anyone publishing code that's happy for others to use it in that way needs to explicitly state that with a license. I do think there's a place for anyone that facilitates code sharing to help raise awareness and make it easy for people to do the right thing. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: revOnline and Open Source
This thread is too long and full of misunderstandings (even from the expert lawyer on the technical side) to reply to every post separately. Here's my take (IANAL but I did work for a open source software foundation and write the licensing FAQs etc): 1) Anything published without an explicit copyright license (or public domain disclaimer) has an implied license for you to make use of it personally but not to redistribute it or derivatives. GitHub very recently woke up to this issue and the huge amount of legally suspect sharing they were encouraging - they added a license picker to their repository creation process: https://help.github.com/articles/open-source-licensing As part of this they created the very helpful http://choosealicense.com/ which in turn includes http://choosealicense.com/no-license/ - for another carefully crafted take on what having no explicit license means. 2) If you choose to create and share an open source library under an open source license then you don't usually also need a contributors agreement. Code contributed to a project with an explicit license falls under the terms of that license. Contributors agreements are for the ultra-paranoid or for situations (like RunRev's) where you need extra rights from the contributors than those given by the license (e.g. RunRev also needs the right to distribute contributions in the commercial version as well as the GPLv3 community version). If you want to have an open source library (usable with community edition) and accept external contributions but you also want to use it in commercial closed source apps then choose a permissive license (e.g. MIT). 3) Stackfiles are (almost certainly) not derivative works. The content of stacks is generated by LiveCode but they do not contain bits of the engine code. You could think of this as similar to the paint package case - most image files will have a header and encode your pixel data in some special machine readable format - they don't put parts of the paint package code in the file. 4) Standalones include the engine code and most definitely are derivative works and thus subject to the GPL. 5) Regardless of licensing issues, you can do whatever you want with (non-password protected) stacks you find on revOnline or anywhere else with the community edition *for your own use* - its further distribution of what you do that is restricted by the GPL. Indeed the GPL very carefully secures your right to do almost anything you like with LiveCode for your own personal consumption. The concept of fair use also applies to things like learning and study, giving you freedom to do those whatever the original license on the stack - it does not usually apply to commercial use or redistribution, although if your use is sufficiently transformative (i.e. you make the code do something else) it may. However, copyright law is frankly completely inappropriate for software, having evolved for books, newspapers, songs etc. There is not a great deal of case law in this area to clear up the mess, I suspect because most software companies don't want to risk precedents being set and thus settle out of court. What precedents there are tend to follow a general trend of you can do whatever you like if you don't distribute it (e.g. hacking/reverse engineering etc) but if you're making money out of any reproduction or derivative work you'll have to pay the copyright holder. As such, it's best to avoid any commercial use of material with unknown licensing. 6) You can't patent ideas - only inventions. Patents for software are an even worse idea than copyright, unfortunately US lobbyists somehow managed to get that form of protection extended. There's a stackexchange site specifically for patent examiners to crowdsource prior art for dodgy patent applications: http://patents.stackexchange.com/ ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: revOnline and Open Source
Kevin Miller wrote: I think most of the people sharing on revOnline are happy for their ideas to be used, otherwise they wouldn't have uploaded the stacks. However I do agree that some legal clarification is a good idea. How about we state that everything on revOnline is automatically public domain, *unless* the author of the stack places a clear notice on the stack that declares copyright and an alternative license of their choice (they can use whatever they like but only if they say so clearly)? This is just a suggestion for feedback, not policy yet, so let me know what you think. Yes, great idea. Just 2 points: 1) CC0 - the creative commons public domain equivalent with fallbacks (you can't give up your rights to your work in the same ways everywhere in the world) is better for software than a simple public domain declaration. 2) You'd do this by making it part of the terms and conditions of use. I'm not at all sure about the legality of retrospectively applying it to content that's already been uploaded without explicit permission, even if you broadcast a change to the T's C's. What fraction of the content is regularly updated? How complex would it be to get permission for the existing stuff? That said, only new stuff having an automatic CC0 license would be much better than doing nothing. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: revOnline and Open Source
Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: If they don't contain *any* code, I agree. If I designed such a file format, it would only have descriptions of what the user did, and would be pure ascii. I can't tell; there are certainly non-ascii characters in there, and I just don't know what they are. I *assume* that they're just part of the description . . . Here's one of many reasons why copyright is so bad for software. Pure ascii file formats are horrendously inefficient for some types of data, yet if file formats aren't human readable then how is anyone supposed to judge whether or not they contain any copyrighted material? I think Monte said that the binary parts of the file are just the properties of the various objects serialised. We could go through the source with a fine-toothed comb to make sure there's no common little bit of code from the engine sources copied into every stack but I don't believe that would create a derivative work in any case. Every stack will have the common handler definitions too, whether generated by the IDE or typed. Starting a story Once upon a time... doesn't make it a derivative work of the first such story to do so (OK probably a bad example as I'm sure that's out of copyright by now but you get the point). It's also not in RunRev's interests to have their engine license infect stacks - that wouldn't work well with the commercial license. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: revOnline and Open Source
Richmond wrote: If copyright is not explicitly stated then, surely, the thing is up for grabs . . . That is very definitely not the case, although ideas can't be copyrighted only a particular expression of an idea. So if you made a calculator app that looked and/or worked exactly like mine, or at least extremely similar then I may be able to sue you for copyright infringement. It's much easier to prove infringement on visual copying than functional copying. I own a copy of The Microbiblion (published 1640), and were I to believe that as it has no explicit copyright statement it was somehow protected by some implicit law I would be flying in the face of the people who published it, when there were no copyright laws, and even the concept of copyright did not exist. If it was published in 1640 then the copyright has definitely expired, whether it existed at the time of creation or not. I believe books currently get 70 years after the year of the author's death and computer created works 50 years from the creation date (what about eBooks I wonder?). After that time they are automatically public domain (in the UK) - the rules differ slightly in different countries but have been adjusted to be broadly the same in most of the developed world at least. From: Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2013, 16:30 Subject: Re: revOnline and Open Source On 08/01/2013 12:52 PM, Robert Mann wrote: So to sum it up : 1. Situation is a big mess :: all stacks published at revOnline are ab initio protected by copyright, which is in apparent conflict with the purpose of revOnline, which is to share code ideas and code. 2. Authors SHOULD specify the terms and license they agree upon 3. Clearly, taking a revOnline stack and distributing a commercial version without the original author consent would be illegal. 4. Open Source Side effect : If authors do not do not care to specify an Open Source License, the stack cannot be simply modified and re-published with OS Livecode, as the second user will have no clean right to do so, except if he asks the original author for authorization or license to do so. That should be cleared a minimum at the revOnline publishing stage otherwise one could end up with a bunch of mixed spaghettis. 5. The protection of libraries remains to be clarified. --- Question :: what if I open a revOline stack, find some handlers and mechanism I like to use elsewhere, just copy part of the script from the editor, modify a little to suit my precise needs and environment. Copyright applies to a complete work and does and should not protect ideas. The purpose of revOnline is to promote the communication of ideas of implementations... so we are on a kind of frontier. So that practice of using revOnline as a source of inspiration should not break copyright rules??? What you are doing is showing how dicky the concept of copyright, unless directly stated, seems to be . . . . . . many years ago my father had the idea of making rubber overshoes for horses, and wrote about that idea to a friend of his, who said that the idea sounded fairly daft . . . . . . almost simultaneously, my father discovered that somebody had had the same idea, and later started marketing the things. There was absolutely no question that my Dad's friend had done anything sneaky with my Dad's idea; he hadn't. Now, I suppose my father could have wasted a lot of time, effort and money trying to make a case for his getting some of the profits from the sales of rubber overshoes for horses because he had had the idea, and written about it to a friend, about a year before the other chap started making them. So: I really don't see how ideas can be copyrighted. I have pupils of mine making calculator apps with Livecode as part of their progging classes with me: I cannot see why (should one of those kids decide to market his/her app) anybody should have to start paying royalties to the first person who developed a calculator app for a computer, or, for that matter, the person who first marketed a handheld electronic calculator. I show the kids I work with my (bust) Sinclair calculator [ http://www.vintage-technology.info/pages/calculators/s/sinccamuni.jpg ] (well it is good for a few laughs), explain its erstwhile functionality on the whiteboard, and off they go with their progging. I am not sending five pound notes to Sir Clive Sinclair (even though I admire tha man immensely). If copyright is not explicitly stated then, surely, the thing is up for grabs . . . I own a copy of The Microbiblion (published 1640), and were I to believe that as it has no explicit copyright statement it was somehow protected by some implicit law I would be flying in the face of the people who published it, when there
Re: Submitting to Apple... at what size ?
The only automated check that Apple are likely to do is ensure that you include the retina splash screen images in the bundle. Beyond that, it's down to a reviewer deciding that your graphics look low-res/poor quality on a retina display - I haven't heard of any rejections for that reason. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: App Failed to install - iPad app
Sadly the install process is one where Apple believes in security through obscurity. You get generic error messages for everything that goes wrong with no further debug info. Make sure you have the correct device ID included in the provisioning profile you are using in the standalone settings, make sure it's a development or ad-hoc profile and not an app store distribution profile and make sure the requirements and restrictions set for the app match up with the ones configured for the app ID on the provisioning portal. If it still doesn't work try taking a look inside the generated .ipa file to see if you can see anything obviously wrong. After that there are some tools for checking the signing/certificates from the command line but best come back to ask about that if you're still stuck. Mark From: Jim Sims s...@ezpzapps.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 10 July 2013, 10:57 Subject: App Failed to install - iPad app Hello - went through the Apple Dev process (Provisioning file made, Device IDs added, etc) then added my test iPad app to the list of apps in iTunes. The app started to install (appeared and blue line for installing) but before completed install it stopped with a dialog of Failed to install App works in Simulator. Any suggestions on how to debug this? sims ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Object Architecture ?
IDE: Object Architecture My take on this was that the IDE part implies this is restructuring of the IDE and not a feature of the engine or language at all. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LiveCode and WebSockets
Thanks Pierre, I'm pretty sure I could make something like that work but it's a nasty kludge, I'm not in any hurry (busy with non-LiveCode projects at the moment anyway) and when I get around to looking at it, I want to do it properly. :) From: Pierre Sahores s...@sahores-conseil.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Tuesday, 9 July 2013, 0:56 Subject: Re: LiveCode and WebSockets Mark , Should work (untested) : Node.js on the server side + revBrowser (desktop) or mobileBrowser (iOS/android) + some js + a href…client-side pseudo urls/a to get catched by : on browserLoadRequested pUrl, pType -- prefered on the iOS platform (desktop platforms untested) end browserLoadRequested and on browserStartedLoading pUrl -- prefered on the Android platform (desktop platforms untested) end browserStartedLoading to being able to exchange bidirectional messages between your web layer to the native livecode one. note : your web view pseudo URLs needs to match existing files (workingpath/file.html…) in your client app sandboxed cache or document directory to be catchable on the Android platform at least. To maintain a common codebase with the iOS app, i have the habit to create the on this platform too. Pierre ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LiveCode and WebSockets
Would you care to discuss the difference between websockets and the socketswe work with in livecode or point me to some basic information on the websocket implementation you think we could implement in pure livecode? What things would keep it from working very efficiently? I see you already have some good references. Proper websockets implement a protocol on top of standard TCP socket connections on port 80. I think you could write or port an implementation of this protocol directly using the sockets available in desktop LiveCode. For socket.io there are also other transports available (i.e. web sockets are emulated over some other transport). I think it might be possible to implement the XHR-polling transport in LiveCode, using load URL for the GET request (with the header set to keep the connection alive - it doesn't return anything until the server wants to send you something) and doing standard HTTP posts. What I don't know is whether LiveCode can actually do a POST request while you still have an async load operation running, or whether it will keep the HTTP connection alive as required by XHR-polling (a.k.a. long polling) rather than just timing out?? As for efficiency, LiveCode has pretty good performance because the language is very high level, so each line of code typically does quite a lot in native code in the engine underneath. Implementing a protocol is quite a low-level thing to do in such a high-level language, parsing/formatting all the messages in LiveCode directly is probably quite computationally expensive vs just putting/getting the content of those messages into/from a websocket object that handles the formatting/parsing for you in native code. Also, as Pierre said, you could kludge this through the browser too, using the socket.io client directly. That's going to be much, much less efficient though. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LiveCode and WebSockets
We know, I'm interested in websockets for realtime comms between apps. Right now I think it'd be possible to implement one or more of the supported transports for socket.io in pure LiveCode but maybe not very efficiently. An alternative would be to wrap existing native implementations as externals. I've not looked into it in any great depth as I'm basically waiting for the engine refactoring to be completed before trying to hook new stuff in. Pierre Sahores s...@sahores-conseil.com wrote: The HTTP(S) REST architecture is full supported on any LC desktop or mobile platform, iOS and Android included. They can be set to act as clients of any kind of nTier server side application (LC-Server, PHP, RoR, etc...). Le 8 juil. 2013 à 18:19, Mark Wilcox a écrit : I'm interested in using something like socket.io as part of a backend for mobile (and maybe also desktop) apps. However, we don't have proper sockets support on mobile (without externals at least) and websockets are very definitely not the same thing as standard sockets. What do you have in mind? I'm certainly interested in discussing it. Mark From: Andrew Kluthe and...@ctech.me To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Monday, 8 July 2013, 16:05 Subject: LiveCode and WebSockets I have been learning a little bit about websockets lately for a project and I have never really played around with livecode's socket communication methods. This makes me curious. Is there anyone else on the list that might be more familiar with both that would be interested in discussing using something like socket.io as part of a backend for livecode desktop applications? -- Regards, Andrew Kluthe and...@ctech.me ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode -- Pierre Sahores mobile : 06 03 95 77 70 www.sahores-conseil.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Memory usage
On desktop platforms, yes, as long as the user hasn't changed settings to disable it (unlikely). On mobile platforms, no, use too much memory and the OS will kill your app. Mark J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.com wrote: Can I safely assume that if I load a whole bunch of stacks into RAM, that virtual memory will take care of memory usage for me? My project is getting huge. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Augmented reality with LiveCode ?
If you don't need the Pro features and can live with the standard Unity splash screen then it's free for iOS now. If those thing aren't true then yes, its several times the cost of LiveCode. Sergio Schvarstein sschvarst...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Mark for your answer. These days I am exploring different possibilities and I found Vuforia as a very possible solution. I will also look Unity, following your advice. I have a lot of 3D programming skills inherited from 3D Lingo so maybe I can find a good path with Unity. I've explored Unity's 3D possibilities a year ago, but the licensing price didn't convinced me. Maybe it's time for a new approach and thanks for reminding it. Regards. __ Sergio Schvarstein sschvarst...@gmail.com __ ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Augmented reality with LiveCode ?
Is there any way or tool for creating an Augmented Reality app for iOS using LiveCode ? LiveCode is (currently at least) a truly terrible tool for building augmented reality apps - primarily because it has no functionality for handling 3d content or 3d rendering. Even if you're doing the sort of AR that's based on sensor input and location with 2d overlays rather than marker or point cloud recognition, you still need to render in a 3d world. With an external you'd either have to handle all of the 3d stuff outside of LiveCode, or build quite a complex interface to enable it to be managed from LiveCode. At least until LiveCode adds 3d graphics capabilities the best general purpose environment for building cross-platform AR apps is Unity and the best library/plugin for tracking markers or point clouds is Qualcomm's Vuforia. I'd suggest looking at those first. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Android published app live...
I've seen anywhere from minutes to a few hours. From: Paul Maguire m...@paulmaguire.me To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2013, 14:48 Subject: Android published app live... Hi. Anyone know how long it takes for a published Android app to go live in Google Play? I pushed the button to publish an hour ago and apparently it should take 'a matter of minutes' Kind regards, Paul. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: OOH! Here are a couple of cool ios7 features that I hope LC takes advantage of!
I think Monte is right, this is per-app control of system services rather than something implemented by the apps themselves. Like you have per-app settings for notifications right now which the user controls, the first two of these will be settings controlled by the IT department. App Data Protection is, as it says, automatic for all apps, although only works while the device is passcode locked. Mark From: Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 26 June 2013, 22:33 Subject: Re: OOH! Here are a couple of cool ios7 features that I hope LC takes advantage of! Without looking at the API's for 7, I was guessing each of those were things that could be set up per app, which, if correct, would then be subject to LC implementing them. The context implied that to me, but I don't know that for sure. This will be unbelievably useful for our in-house apps, and will both greatly reduce the stress we go through with them, and will make iOS the first choice, I think, for in-house apps. On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: All three of these look like things that IT departments setup and work with any app... managed open in for example would just change the list of open in apps you see in mergDoc. Just a way for them to further interfere with your life when you BYOD On 27/06/2013, at 3:27 AM, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.com wrote: www.apple.com/ios/ios7/business/ 1) Managed Open In - can make your data only openable in your app, which takes the sandbox (which was already really good) even further 2) Per app VPN 3) App Data Protection is now automatic, no need to set it for your app. -- On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth On the second day, God created the oceans. On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, and did a little diving. And God said, This is good. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode -- Monte Goulding M E R Goulding - software development services mergExt - There's an external for that! ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode -- On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth On the second day, God created the oceans. On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, and did a little diving. And God said, This is good. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: iOS App from 2012 - iphone5 pages are resized in simulator
(you can check inside the app bundle - it has to be called default-5...@2x.png) Sorry to avoid causing confusion, let me correct my typo - that should have been default-5...@2x.png. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Post command help
Another suggestion would be setting the property libUrlSetSSLVerification to false as this may also resolve the issue.. Another question: does setting libUrlSetSSLVerification to false mean security is turned off completely, or only that the certificate isn't checked? Not doing SSL Certificate Verification means that the certificate isn't checked, the content is still sent encrypted. Whether this matters depends on the setup - if you control both the client and server ends then it's not such a big deal, although technically it does leave you vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks. You still have the option of bundling a collection of root certificates with your app (and you can find up to date collections online freely) but that will mean the certificates will not be updated unless your app is, so overtime they will go out of date. If you're only connecting to your own server that's not much of a problem either - you need to give everyone an update of the app when a certificate in your one certificate chain expires but that's all. Keeping a general set of certificates for the open web up to date is another matter entirely. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Running LiveCode on Google Chrome Books
Mike Kerner wrote: The new units also have a certain amount of local storage for using with Google Drive. The chromebook is designed mainly to be a lightweight, fast, cheap, high-battery life machine for running HTML5. The main weakness, IMHO, is that it is about 5 years late because ipads and android tablets are far more appealing at around the same money. This is very true - in fact, Android tablets (+ a keyboard case if you need one) are available for much less and they're getting cheaper and more capable at an astonishing rate. Wholesale price in China is $45 (US) for decent Android tablets and falling. You can buy capable devices 10 in the UK for just over £100 (a bit more than half that for 7). Keyboard cases are about $10 for USB and $25-50 for Bluetooth. If you want something portable primarily for a single simple app then it's definitely worth looking into. The lack of decent tablet software for Android in general makes then much less appealing than iPads at much higher prices for general use currently - that's bound to change for a lot of people over the next year or two though. Personally I don't see the point of the Chromebooks at all. Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: old habits are hard to break
Richmond wrote: Well that is rather the same as my being extremely mean when removing the core of a green pepper, cutting as near to the stem as possible, because at one time in my life I was really living on the edge, financially (when I was in the USA); while now I can both afoord lots of green peppers and live in a country where they are super abundant. It's not exactly the same though. With a physical thing like a green pepper, cutting nearer the stem will always get you more to eat. Micro-optimisations to code are dependent on assumptions about underlying compilers/interpreters and hardware and so generally best avoided until required. A good example from this thread is having four different versions of the same function with tiny variations at the beginning. One of the key bottlenecks in a modern device (desktop or mobile) is the speed of the RAM vs the speed of the processor; if your whole program doesn't fit in the CPU caches then splitting out function variants can actually make things slower, due to the need to fetch a different variant from RAM (or even disk or flash memory) vs having a single longer version that remains in cache. Combine that with the fact that you then have to maintain multiple versions of the same code and we have a good example why premature optimization is the root of all evil (Donald Knuth). Most people use very high level languages like LiveCode to optimise for code clarity, simplicity and readability - certainly not performance. Maybe the old habits are worth the effort required to break them? Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: mobile image gallery / slider - web or standalone based?
Yes, my file-based method is purely to avoid needing to run a server at all (because it's really cheap just to host files on, say, Amazon S3) but if you run your own servers anyway then it's a much neater solution to have a simple API to tell you which images you need to download and where to get them from. The usual pattern here is for the app to store the date of the last time it refreshed it's local cache and send this to the server every time it starts up to find out if it needs to download any updates. This way you can use server side timestamps for everything and avoid the problem of device time skew. Mark From: Matthias Rebbe matthias_livecode_150...@m-r-d.de To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Thursday, 6 June 2013, 11:31 Subject: Re: mobile image gallery / slider - web or standalone based? Mark, thank your for your thoughts. I think i will let livecode download the images to store and chache them directly. I could let my livecode app communicate with an LiveCode server script to get information about modification dates. Regards, Matthias ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: First App rejected for odd reasons
I may be wrong about this (can anyone verify?), but if you're building for iOS 5 or later, you should be perfectly safe selecting armv7 only and building for that, since any devices capable of running iOS 5 and above are armv7 devices only. Yes, this is correct and a good idea - the iPhone 3G was the last device to have an ARMv6 processor and that can only run iOS 4.3 or earlier - that's why Apple has dropped support for armv6 builds from the more recent Xcode versions. I expect (really hope) that LiveCode only duplicates the engine code within the Universal binary and puts the main stack in a data section that is shared by both code variants - if that's the case, this might only save you a few megabytes of engine code, but you should do it anyway - iOS5+ with armv6 is pure waste. I'd not seen the main executable size issue before and a quick Google suggests both this and the not yet mandatory PIE warning are new. This is either a subtle crackdown on low quality apps produced by tools other than XCode or there are some new products or tools on the way which will care about this in the future. I'll bring it up on the engine forum. As I understand it, only the main stack is actually bundled inside the executable in a standalone, so a simple fix would be to create a launcher stack as your main stack which simply loads the previous main stack which you can include in the bundle separately. However, creating apps much, much larger than they need to be is not friendly to your users. Large images should be JPEG compressed - if they contain text that loses quality due to JPEG compression then split the images up (or if it's all text, store it as text not an image!). Audio should also be in a suitable compressed format (i.e. not WAV). In this case it sounds like LiveCode 6's application browser might be handy for finding out what's actually inside the stack easily, then removing all the media and referencing it externally. Otherwise it might be easier to rebuild the stack by copying the scripts across into a new one that only references external media from the start? Mark From: Chris Sheffield cmsheffi...@icloud.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 20:54 Subject: Re: First App rejected for odd reasons Another thought. In the standalone settings, are you building a universal binary? I may be wrong about this (can anyone verify?), but if you're building for iOS 5 or later, you should be perfectly safe selecting armv7 only and building for that, since any devices capable of running iOS 5 and above are armv7 devices only. This may also reduce the size of your executable. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: mobile image gallery / slider - web or standalone based?
Hi Matthias, If you go the LiveCode route you can download updates to images in the background to add/replace existing ones in the app - just make sure you include the images external to the stack. No need to do app updates to replace images. If you went the browser/jqtouch route in a native app you could also use standard web cache control features so the images didn't get reloaded all the time - you just have to manually persist your own browser cache between app launches. I don't know for sure but I doubt LiveCode does this last bit for you, so the web option is not as flexible right now and the slide/scroll performance will be poorer (a LiveCode swipe should move the image with your finger, like you're actually dragging the page, while the jqtouch version lags, so you've already swiped when the image starts moving). If you really prefer to create the gallery with web technology then you could use LiveCode to download updates to local files and have your web content reference those, rather than remote images directly. The downside to loading the images in the background with LiveCode at present is I don't think you can get the HTTP headers for the image files with LiveCode (which would let you check things like last modified date on files and folders on the web server) so you'd have to maintain a small file on your web server with details of the latest files and their modification dates so the app can figure out what it need to download in order to avoid lots of repeated downloads of the same files. Does that make sense? Mark From: Matthias Rebbe matthias_livecode_150...@m-r-d.de To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 19:43 Subject: mobile image gallery / slider - web or standalone based? Hi, what would be the best way to create a mobile image gallery with slider effect. I have to include an image gallery in an mobile app (ios and android). Would it be better to realize that image gallery slider (swiping with the finger) as web based thing with jqtouch and use a native browser to integrate that in the mobile app? Advantage would be the ease of adding/replacing images. Disadvantage: The user does need an internet connection to see the images. Or is it much better to include all 30 images within the app and create the image gallery/slider with livecode? Advantage: Images are already on the device. No need to download them again and again. Disadvantage: Adding/replacing images means updating the app in the stores I would prefer to create a web based image gallery and show that in a native browser control. What do you think? Regards, Matthias ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: First App rejected for odd reasons
Hi Tom, No need to test JPEGs again on iOS/Android - the JPEG format itself doesn't support transparency! :) If you need transparency then there is another option which is to store the image and it's mask (effectively alpha channel) separately, although I've not worked with these features in LiveCode. If you have a number of very large images such that your app is genuinely hundreds of megabytes it's worth doing some optimisation - some users will not download really big apps to avoid using up limited storage space on their device. From a performance perspective any further compression of the data (e.g. JPEGs are smaller) actually makes more work for the device decompressing it although you're unlikely to notice the difference - it's only when you're downloading the images that making them smaller improves performance. One uncompressed image at iPad retina resolution is at least 12MB. 14 of those is 168MB. I generalised on large images before - PNGs can be very good for compressing images with relatively few colours in large blocks but terrible for compressing photographs. That said, sticking with PNG there are ways to get the exact same image much smaller with a better compressor. Take a look at this: http://imageoptim.com/ipad.html On the engine forum Mark Waddingham has said that they can tweak the build process to remove images (and even the main stack) from the executable fairly easily for future releases. Then the executable will only be about the size of the compiled engine, even if the app itself is much bigger. Mark's response also hinted that maybe if you're building a universal binary (i.e. more than just armv7) you might be getting 2 copies of everything in the main stack within the executable. So I'm not sure what would constitute a stack being 'much larger' than it needs to be - in my first case it was the main stack that was large and now it is the images folder that is large - either way the download is going to be the same size and be too big for cellular download (which is why I believe Apple has that warning in the first place.) Well, for a photograph, a PNG might give you 4:1 compression while due to the retina nature of the iPad display you typically can't see the reduced quality for the same image at medium quality 40:1 JPEG compression - full resolution with more compression usually looks better than 25% (original iPad) resolution with less compression. I'd say 10x the size is much bigger. :) The size restriction is new and unrelated to the 3G download limit (which is 50MB). For now we can only speculate what the limit is for. Mark From: Thomas McGrath III mcgra...@mac.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 5 June 2013, 13:41 Subject: Re: First App rejected for odd reasons Mark, At first I wanted to object to the need for JPEG only for large images as all of the research that I have done (especially concerning transparency issues) has told me to never use JPEG (except for the web) in most of my apps but then I realized that I have not tested those same results for iOS and Android engines, so I will need to do those tests again to verify/reject my findings. That said, using 2048 png's with transparency layers on fourteen cards with special visual effects and playing song files on one channel and a voice over on another channel did not slow down either the logic code or the effects code. I created a Ken Burns effect in LC and it runs as smoothly with the larger images as it does with smaller variations. So I'm not sure what would constitute a stack being 'much larger' than it needs to be - in my first case it was the main stack that was large and now it is the images folder that is large - either way the download is going to be the same size and be too big for cellular download (which is why I believe Apple has that warning in the first place.) I would not think that 14 retina sized images on 14 different cards is too large for a mobile app and that instead they must be referenced and that that would be a requirement. Normally I think if it was like 50 images it should be referenced but not just 14. Most LC projects I have seen all use lower quality images or regular 1024 images enlarged for retina via code, but they are definitely not retina images. All of that said, I think what you stated is spot on and should be included in a best practices type document somewhere for mobile development. Maybe with some recommendations for audio and compression comparisons. Thanks, Tom -- Tom McGrath III http://lazyriver.on-rev.com mcgra...@mac.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Successful recipe for LC iPhone apps...
I haven't submitted an app but here's my take on the official Apple stance and what it means: All apps have to support the iPhone 5 resolution (or 4 Retina) and retina displays since May 1st. The iPhone 5 thing is clear - your app must scale to that resolution and not run in compatibility mode (with the black bars top and bottom). IIRC you need to include a default-5...@2x.png file (640x1136 px) image for the system not to put you in compatibility mode - even if it's a plain black one. The retina display support thing is not clear - if your app doesn't look great on a retina display they might reject it. Scaling images up programatically is definitely not banned though. If you're building native apps with Xcode they obviously want you to include @2x variants of all your images but the situation for apps built with other tools is less clear. I'm guessing most apps that include the default.png in all the @2x variants will probably be OK for now, since that's the only thing they can easily check programatically at submission time. Position independent code is only a warning for now and RunRev will fix that problem in a forthcoming release by setting the appropriate compile/link flags - looks like it's to do with a new security feature Apple are enabling to get better traction in the enterprise market. You do definitely need LC 6.0.2 (or 5.5.5) to get the UDID fix though. Mark From: John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 5 June 2013, 13:10 Subject: Successful recipe for LC iPhone apps... There seems to be lots of stories about rejection of LC apps from the iTunes store around.. What is the position regarding submission these days in the ever shifting sands of Apples' whims ? Has the iphone app got to be built at 640 x 960 ? What has position independant code got to do with building the app in liveCode ? I have an app ready for submission, but it has been built at 320 x 480... reading the stories on the forums it seems that submitting at this size will attract a rejection... is this correct ? Anybody submitted one recently and it got through ? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Successful recipe for LC iPhone apps...
Not using images? Are you using images for your graphics/buttons, or is everything procedurally generated? My guess is that it won't matter at least at the moment, although procedurally generated stuff is definitely OK. The default.png and variants (e.g. default-5...@2x.png) I mentioned are what LiveCode calls splash screens (they are not actually meant to be used as splash screens according to Apple's HIG - apologies for using the native iOS coding terminology) in the standalone application settings. I'm not sure what the standalone builder does if you don't set one for a particular resolution? I assume the app icon should also have a retina version for them to accept apps now. Beyond that if they think your app looks low-res on a retina display then they might reject it but I doubt there are any official criteria. Mark From: John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 5 June 2013, 16:38 Subject: RE: Successful recipe for LC iPhone apps... Mark... Thanks for the reply... I have already a couple of apps in the store that will run at the correct size, ie both on the iphone 4 and the iphone 5... I am not using any images... I am vague about whether we have to now only develop in a stack size of 640 x 960, for the iphone 4 or 640 x 1136 for the 5... or can I still lay it out at 320 x 480 as long as graphics and buttons are moved to appropriate places if the user should choose the run the app on an iphone 5 ? Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 16:06:18 +0100 From: m_p_wil...@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: Successful recipe for LC iPhone apps... To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com I haven't submitted an app but here's my take on the official Apple stance and what it means: All apps have to support the iPhone 5 resolution (or 4 Retina) and retina displays since May 1st. The iPhone 5 thing is clear - your app must scale to that resolution and not run in compatibility mode (with the black bars top and bottom). IIRC you need to include a default-5...@2x.png file (640x1136 px) image for the system not to put you in compatibility mode - even if it's a plain black one. The retina display support thing is not clear - if your app doesn't look great on a retina display they might reject it. Scaling images up programatically is definitely not banned though. If you're building native apps with Xcode they obviously want you to include @2x variants of all your images but the situation for apps built with other tools is less clear. I'm guessing most apps that include the default.png in all the @2x variants will probably be OK for now, since that's the only thing they can easily check programatically at submission time. Position independent code is only a warning for now and RunRev will fix that problem in a forthcoming release by setting the appropriate compile/link flags - looks like it's to do with a new security feature Apple are enabling to get better traction in the enterprise market. You do definitely need LC 6.0.2 (or 5.5.5) to get the UDID fix though. Mark From: John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Wednesday, 5 June 2013, 13:10 Subject: Successful recipe for LC iPhone apps... There seems to be lots of stories about rejection of LC apps from the iTunes store around.. What is the position regarding submission these days in the ever shifting sands of Apples' whims ? Has the iphone app got to be built at 640 x 960 ? What has position independant code got to do with building the app in liveCode ? I have an app ready for submission, but it has been built at 320 x 480... reading the stories on the forums it seems that submitting at this size will attract a rejection... is this correct ? Anybody submitted one recently and it got through ? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
RE: Import Snapshot in iOS
Is everyone using the same versions of LiveCode and iOS? The code in GitHub
looks like it won't successfully capture a rectangle from an accelerated
screen on any recent iOS version.
John Dixon dixo...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
Ender...
There is not a problem with importing a snapshot from a rectangle !.. and it
doesn't matter is acceleratedRendering is true or false.. or has even left the
room ..:-)
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 03:13:59 +0300
From: endern...@gmail.com
To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Subject: Re: Import Snapshot in iOS
Yepp :)
*import from object* works fine.
The problem is *import from rect* notation.
@Roger,
for now the only solution seems this piece of code:
_set the acceleratedRendering of this stack to false
_import snapshot from rect tRect
_set the acceleratedRendering of this stack to true
My sample stack in the forum post works without a glitch with this update.
So, the code in that stack does 3 things:
* Prohibits the black snapshot {turning off the a-R temporarily}
* Prohibits the transparent blank snapshot {excluding the iPhone status bar}
* Places the final snapshot into the visible portion of the screen
Best,
~ Ender Nafi
~… together, we're smarter …~
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Import Snapshot in iOS
I looked up the iOS snapshot code. It looks to me as if it renders the contents of the window into a bitmap context. I've written my own screen snapshot and video recording code on iOS and this doesn't capture the contents of a view/window drawn directly with OpenGL - for that you need to read back the pixels from the hardware graphics accelerator directly. So if my understanding of accelerated rendering is correct, then this shouldn't work - if LiveCode didn't block you making the call in that mode, you should get back a black image. I'm hoping to find out how to trace my way down from a command to the code that implements it in a workshop on Thursday. Curious to look at this one some more when I understand the code better. Mark From: Roger Guay i...@mac.com To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2013, 19:59 Subject: Re: Import Snapshot in iOS Richard, I presume you were asking anyone on the list. I, for one, do not know! Roger On May 14, 2013, at 9:37 AM, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: Ender Nafi wrote: Roger's right. It's an odd thing but setting the a-R to true prohibits importing snapshots. Commenting it out fixes the issue. Not tested in LiveCode 6.0.1, though… That's not mentioned in the Dictionary. Is that a documentation bug, or does it only affect the older method of importing snapshots by rect while still allowing the new method of making snapshots from object references? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Import Snapshot in iOS
Yes, the code I looked at definitely took a rect and not an object. I suspect the new method is not taking a snapshot of the screen at all but rendering the object into an image. Wouldn't using the new method and asking for the current card work for most scenarios? Presumably if you want a subset of the screen after that you can crop part of the image? Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: I recently stumbled across this post by Ender Nafi which confirm my hunch that it's only the older import from rect option that fails, and the newer import from object seems to work well: http://forums.runrev.com/viewtopic.php?f=49t=15093#p75531 -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for Desktop, Mobile, and Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: While the forum is down...
Does LiveCode validate the provisioning profile in any way? Even if it does it shouldn't be too hard to remove that requirement from the IDE/build system since it's all open source. Xcode allows you to build binaries without signing them so I don't see any good reason why LiveCode should do any jailbreak policing. Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net wrote: Although in theory what you ask could be done, LiveCode won't build the standalone app if you haven't selected a provisioning profile, and you would only have one of those if you had an iPhone developer license. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: While the forum is down...
You can't build and run unless you have an appropriately provisioned device connected but you can build or archive without one - you need to be able to for building anything that's not signed for your device, including app store submission builds. Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net wrote: This may not be true. I just tried, and Xcode let me test on iOS Simulator, but when I tried to build for iOS Device it complained about there being no provisioned iOS devices connected. When I connected my iPhone 5, which is provisioned and in my iOS developer account, I could then test on that device. Xcode allows you to build binaries without signing them so I don't see any good reason why LiveCode should do any jailbreak policing. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Odin down ?
Heather said the on-rev site would be down but the service should be up. Colin Holgate co...@verizon.net wrote: Everything is down until Tuesday. On May 11, 2013, at 7:25 PM, Martin Koob mk...@rogers.com wrote: I just checked my site hosted on odin and it is not responding. Also when I tried to log in with cPanel there is no response. I sent an support request to supp...@on-rev.com with 'URGENT' in the subject line. I think that is the way to get emergency support. I usually used the web form at www.on-rev.com but that is down too. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: automated iOS rejection: Non-public API usage
kellymdempewolf kellymdempew...@gmail.com wrote: Is there any way that I can work around this to fix it in my own app in the meantime? Sadly not, this is why I suggested some sort of community supported process as a safety net for Apple rule changes. Your app almost certainly doesn't use the UDID but the LiveCode engine binary links to the banned method, so you can't pass the automated test until you have a LiveCode commercial build with the offending method call removed. I could build a standalone with it removed from the community version source code but that can't be used to submit to the app store. Probably worth adding a note to the bug report and let them know which LiveCode version you're using since they may want to prioritise patch releases for those actively waiting to submit apps. Mark From: kellymdempewolf kellymdempew...@gmail.com To: use-revolut...@lists.runrev.com Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013, 14:46 Subject: Re: automated iOS rejection: Non-public API usage Is there any way that I can work around this to fix it in my own app in the meantime? I have an app that needs to be sent to iTunes but I have the same rejection happening! (I have subscribed to the bug report so I'll see when it's fixed but for now I need to get the app sent!) Thanks! -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/automated-iOS-rejection-Non-public-API-usage-tp4664353p4664566.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: suspend/resume messages on Android?
Terry Judd terry.j...@unimelb.edu.au wrote: I'm guessing the OS probably doesn't notify the app that it's suspended. Maybe not. I think you can potentially get a list of active processes and determine which one is active. If we could poll that list using an external - if we ever get externals for Android - then we could build our own suspend and resume routine. I know the RunRev team are awesome but I'm a little perplexed anyone would assume that the Android app lifecycle model is completely broken rather than there's simply a bug/missing feature in LiveCode. Android does indeed send apps (actually Activities) messages about pause/resume and losing/gaining focus. I had a quick look in the code and as far as I could tell most of the relevant messages get passed from Java through to native code and then simply logged. As I understand it, LiveCode iOS apps only officially support exiting on suspend. What do you think should happen instead on Android? Mark ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
