Re: Metacard 4
Hi friends, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. Shao Sean already figured out how the new standalone building process (it is completely in the engine now, no scripted solution anymore!) works and gave me the appropriate infos. So be assured that all will be working fine in MC 4.0 once Rev 4.0 will be published. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com Best Klaus P.S. -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major.on-rev.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Klaus Major wrote: Hi friends, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. Shao Sean already figured out how the new standalone building process (it is completely in the engine now, no scripted solution anymore!) works and gave me the appropriate infos. So be assured that all will be working fine in MC 4.0 once Rev 4.0 will be published. And THAT, surely, is the question. ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Am 07.10.2009 um 09:49 schrieb Richmond Mathewson: Klaus Major wrote: Hi friends, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. Shao Sean already figured out how the new standalone building process (it is completely in the engine now, no scripted solution anymore!) works and gave me the appropriate infos. So be assured that all will be working fine in MC 4.0 once Rev 4.0 will be published. And THAT, surely, is the question. Thank you VER MUCH for your confidence! Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major.on-rev.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Klaus Major wrote: Am 07.10.2009 um 09:49 schrieb Richmond Mathewson: Klaus Major wrote: Hi friends, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. Shao Sean already figured out how the new standalone building process (it is completely in the engine now, no scripted solution anymore!) works and gave me the appropriate infos. So be assured that all will be working fine in MC 4.0 once Rev 4.0 will be published. And THAT, surely, is the question. I meant: How Long Will We Wait for The Final Version of Rev 4.0! Thank you VER MUCH for your confidence! I have complete confidence in you, Klaus; I do feel funny about elastic-sided GANTT charts, epsecially those made in Edinburgh . . . :) ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Epsecially sic transit gloria mundi. Love, Richmond. ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Hi Richmond, Klaus Major wrote: Am 07.10.2009 um 09:49 schrieb Richmond Mathewson: Klaus Major wrote: Hi friends, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. Shao Sean already figured out how the new standalone building process (it is completely in the engine now, no scripted solution anymore!) works and gave me the appropriate infos. So be assured that all will be working fine in MC 4.0 once Rev 4.0 will be published. And THAT, surely, is the question. I meant: How Long Will We Wait for The Final Version of Rev 4.0! Thank you VER MUCH for your confidence! I have complete confidence in you, Klaus; Aha, OK, then thou shalt be forgiven! I do feel funny about elastic-sided GANTT charts, epsecially those made in Edinburgh . . . :) :-D Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major.on-rev.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. I experience this on Windows, but did not test on MacOS. We need to make sure (Klaus?) that the final version 4.0 *will* be compatible with our Standalone Builder. Concerning Richmond's assessment of Metacard: Metacard is not going forwards; it is now just an old, passé user interface jammed onto an engine that deserves and requires something a lot better; and that something is already well developed: Runtime Revolution. Please, take look at my two contributions to the recent thread Practical limits on object counts on the use-revolution list. For a number of - maybe very personal - reasons I do roughly 95 % percent of my development in the Metacard IDE. Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. I experience this on Windows, but did not test on MacOS. We need to make sure (Klaus?) that the final version 4.0 *will* be compatible with our Standalone Builder. This is discussed in the v4 engine change log: -- Standalone Building ~~~ The method by which standalone building is done has changed in this release. Standalones are now built in such a way that they behave much better as executable files on all three platforms. In particular, Revolution standalone executables can now: - be digitally signed using the various OS tools on Windows and Mac OS X - have arbitrarily sized document and application ICO files used on Windows - have their resources edited on Windows - be used with various third-party executable processing tools (such as compressors, trial run makers, network key wrappers etc.) In order to achieve this, it has been necessary to implement the core operation of standalone building in the (ide) engine. This means that the standalone engine provided in the distribution is no longer generally useful as anything other than the shell which is used to form the standalone. In particular, it cannot be used to build standalones using the method previously used nor can it be used as a generic command line engine. The new method of standalone building also improves on the previous method by implicitly compressing and masking the main stackfile that is being built. This reduces standalone size, and also makes it harder for individuals to attempt to reverse-engineer a built standalone. I'll be talking with Kevin next week and will remind him that we'll need the API. Concerning Richmond's assessment of Metacard: Metacard is not going forwards; it is now just an old, passé user interface jammed onto an engine that deserves and requires something a lot better; and that something is already well developed: Runtime Revolution. Please, take look at my two contributions to the recent thread Practical limits on object counts on the use-revolution list. For a number of - maybe very personal - reasons I do roughly 95 % percent of my development in the Metacard IDE. Me too. :) It's been very valuable for the community in a number of ways, even for those who don't use it: as a lean with-the-grain way of working it helps isolate problems that can be more difficult to track down if there were only one IDE. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
J. Landman Gay wrote: Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. Um, why do I have the feeling that rewriting the MC SB is not on the top of Mark Waddingham's to-do list? After all, Mark's bread and cheese is paid for by RunRev sales; an MC license is a 'free' bit that can come along with a RunRev license, and I really wonder how many people out there are buying new versions of RunRev just so they can get their hands on a newer version of MC. MC is rapidly becoming an interface that is so crude it is increasingly difficult to access the burgeoning new features being introduced into the RunRev engine. If this has to be done (and I stand by my previous comments) it will have to be done by somebody else. Having said that, seemingly hypocritically, I will request an MC license number when the final version of RunRev 4 comes out; even if only to fiddle around with MC's GUI (if I can find the time). After all, the RunRev UI is not to everyone's taste and I have found that 'hacking' it is rather time consuming. The only reason I can see for continuing having MC is that in some ways it is easier to develop a new GUI on top of than RunRev. Has anybody tried using the RunRev 4 dp4 SB with MC? ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Richmond Mathewson wrote: J. Landman Gay wrote: Wilhelm Sanke wrote: This may have been already noticed here, I just want to make sure: The Rev Standalone files - necessary to build standalones - of versions 4 dp3 and dp4 do not work with the Metacard Standalone Builder. Version 3.5 does. Mark Waddingham mentioned to me some time ago that the MC SB will need rewriting. I sent him a copy of the current MC builder script and he said it wouldn't be hard to rewrite -- but that's the last I heard. Um, why do I have the feeling that rewriting the MC SB is not on the top of Mark Waddingham's to-do list? It probably isn't, and needn't be: standalone building is now just another engine command. We've been doing the much harder job of maintaining the scripted standalone building implementation; I would imagine it will be much simpler once RunRev hands off the argument list to Klaus or myself. It needn't take any of Mr. Waddingham's time at all. MC is rapidly becoming an interface that is so crude it is increasingly difficult to access the burgeoning new features being introduced into the RunRev engine. The nature of your communications here raises the question of why you're here. You've made your point quite clearly and more than once; you can rest assured we get it. Consider it merely a matter of personal taste if that helps. Having said that, seemingly hypocritically, I will request an MC license number when the final version of RunRev 4 comes out; even if only to fiddle around with MC's GUI (if I can find the time). No need; there are no MC license numbers anymore. Mark Waddingham did a brilliant thing with Rev 2.7 which made their investment in the engine more secure while simplifying the work of making custom IDEs: they went back to engine-based licensing as Raney used to do. But unlike Raney, their license restrictions are time-based rather than scriptLimits-based, so they had to put that logic into the engine. And they did so beautifully: the engine requires a valid licensed Rev install, but once that's in place you can make any IDE you want. The engine is able to verify the license key on its own, so the overhead for them and their MC-fan customers of maintaining two different license keys is a thing of the past. Simple, flexible, secures RunRev's interests -- truly a win-win for all. They get paid, you get freedom. What's not to love? :) Has anybody tried using the RunRev 4 dp4 SB with MC? Until the standalone API is delivered I can't. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Richmond Mathewson wrote: 1. You need to own some sort of RunRev Studio or Enterprise to be able to pop the engine into the MC environment. True. The engine-based licensing Mr. Waddingham introduced in v2.7 has opened up whole new worlds for developers, allowing anyone to make any IDE environment they want with no risk to RunRev since any of them require a licensed installation of the core Rev product. 2. The Metacard standalone builder does not allow one to build the MC equivalent of revlets: not even sure what they would be called: MetaCrudlets ? Metalets ? Metlets ? Not currently, but neither does the shipping version of Rev. Based on comments from Kevin on the improve-rev list we can expect this to be supportable in the MC IDE by the time Rev 4 ships. As for terminology, it seems simpler to just call them Revlets. MC is just a colection of tools; the engine is always the engine, the format always the format. 3. The difficulty of getting under the hood with the MC IDE is awful, and is becoming increasingly awful. I find very much the opposite. What would you like to do that you found difficult. I'm no fan of Raney's code style, but with about 1/10th as much code and no mirrored messages or custom props being added to ones work I find mucking around in MC much simpler. Having paid for RunRev (you cannot make MC from the Free revMedia as the RunRev engine is wrapped up with everything else) why not just us it? I think it's largely a matter of taste. For myself, I prefer to minimize the differences between development and runtime, and MC's lean workflow provides higher fidelity between the two than with Rev. For example, just last week I was stuck trying to fix a bug that only occurs at runtime when building EXEs in Rev, since Rev alters your objects by adding a hidden group containing a number of buttons which will take up to seven of the ten available backscript slots, and at least one of the frontScript slots. For many apps this may be fine, but I make extensive use of backscripts and need the slots the engine provides. But moreover, if there's anything wrong with the Rev scripts you have no choice in the matter - it will always include at least some of them, and in my case it was trapping Apple event messages in ways I could only work around by moving my handler into a frontScript to get it before RunRev's code did. In MC this is never a problem, since its standalones requires no frontScripts or backScripts, and the only two libraries which it may included leave you in control of how they're loaded. Know the engine. Trust the engine. Use the engine. :) -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Richard Gaskin wrote: Know the engine. Trust the engine. Use the engine. Mind-numbing mantras are used for just that; to numb the mind and stop all discussion and critical thinking. This is why, although I work only with RunRev, I keep looking at HyperNext, Elefat and so on, because, while at the moment they amount to very little, they may, in due course, either give RunRev a run for its money, or prick it sufficiently not to become monopolistically complacent. Metacard is not going forwards; it is now just an old, passé user interface jammed onto an engine that deserves and requires something a lot better; and that something is already well developed: Runtime Revolution. ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Richmond Mathewson wrote: Richard Gaskin wrote: Know the engine. Trust the engine. Use the engine. Mind-numbing mantras are used for just that; to numb the mind and stop all discussion and critical thinking. This is why, although I work only with RunRev, I keep looking at HyperNext, Elefat and so on, because, while at the moment they amount to very little, they may, in due course, either give RunRev a run for its money, or prick it sufficiently not to become monopolistically complacent. Metacard is not going forwards; it is now just an old, passé user interface jammed onto an engine that deserves and requires something a lot better; and that something is already well developed: Runtime Revolution. Thank you for your helpful comments. There's no requirement to use the MC IDE, and no one here is stopping you from using the Rev IDE. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Hi Richmond Mathewson and y'all, I had Metacard 4 up and running with a dataGrid yesterday night. So.. how was it? Did it work? Is it HOT? On a similar note, what do y'all think of the REVLET feature ? Has anyone used it? Did it work? Is it HOT? Specifically: Which UserLevel does a Revlet allow ? 1) Browse : e.g. navigate, click on buttons, activate menus ...) 2) Edit : is it possible to edit and format the content of fields ? 3) Draw : is is possible to draw lines shapes while online ? 4) Author : is it possible to create, edit move parts while online ? 5) Script : is it possible to script parts so-on while online ? Gradually succumbing to the allure of Rev, ;-) Alain __ Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Bon soir Alain, Hi Richmond Mathewson and y'all, I had Metacard 4 up and running with a dataGrid yesterday night. So.. how was it? Did it work? Is it HOT? Well, there is no reason why it should NOT work! And MC is HOT anyway :-) On a similar note, what do y'all think of the REVLET feature ? Has anyone used it? Did it work? Is it HOT? ... Sorry, did not have the time to play around with Revlets so far... But I will surely supply a MC IDE 4.0 shortly after Rev 4.0 arrives! :-) Gradually succumbing to the allure of Rev, ;-) Alain Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major.on-rev.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Metacard 4
Alain Farmer wrote: Specifically: Which UserLevel does a Revlet allow ? Rev has no user levels. Stacks allow whatever you program them to do. 1) Browse : e.g. navigate, click on buttons, activate menus ...) Yes, of course. Without that it wouldn't be worth much. 2) Edit : is it possible to edit and format the content of fields ? Certainly edit. I haven't tried formatting, though fields support all the usual text styles and properties and I don't see why it wouldn't work. I do know a revlet I created displays formatted text just fine. You'd need to add some buttons or command keys to manage styles, but once you can catch the commands the formatting should work fine. Revlets are just stacks and do everything stacks can do on the desktop, barring a few bugs that are still being worked out. It is currently still in alpha. However, I've thrown some complicated stacks at it and they have all worked fine except for secondary windows, which right now tend to open behind the browser window (so it appears they didn't open, but if you move the browser window you will see them.) This is a known problem and it's being ironed out. Currently visual effects don't work and custom cursors aren't yet supported. These too are being fixed. 3) Draw : is is possible to draw lines shapes while online ? Certainly. There is a demo of that on the web site. 4) Author : is it possible to create, edit move parts while online ? Yes. See the demo stacks. 5) Script : is it possible to script parts so-on while online ? Haven't tried that, but I don't see why not. Of course, every iteration of the revlet is a new instance, so no changes can be saved to it and any previous changes are immediately forgotten if you reload the page (the same as any web page.) You can, however, write to the user's hard drive (if they give security permissions to do so) and save data there. Or you can save it to the server. Revlets are not the only new web technology. Equally powerful is the new iRev server-side scripting. The old-style CGIs will be a thing of the past. Right now you need an on-rev account so you can use their server, but eventually the server software will be available for installation on your own site. IRev works much like PHP, but you can write it in xtalk. You can mix html and rev code within the same handler. For example, this creates a table whose content is based on the values contained in a variable sQuestions: ?rev command outputRow pName,pLabel,pVotes ? tr td width=30 align=centerinput type=radio name=response value=?rev put pName ? /td td align=center?rev put pLabel ?/td td align=center?rev put pVotes ?/td /tr ?rev end outputRow ? table cellspacing=0 cellpadding=5 bgcolor=#CC border=1 width=400 th width=30 /thth align=centerActivity/thth align=centerVotes/th ?rev repeat with x = 1 to the number of lines in sQuestions outputRow item 1 of line x of sQuestions, item 2 of line x of sQuestions,line x of sVotes end repeat ? /table You can set headers, track cookies, retrieve POST and GET values, etc. with new built-in functions and keywords. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
