Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

I don’t know what is legal for sure but it seems to me once the code was sold and then Livecode made a commercial product using the code it opens the door for others to use the code in a similar fashion as Livecode since the sold the code and the similar rights went with it. What compiled code is

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:04 PM, JB wrote: > Around a year or so ago I read Apple was thinking > of making xCode open source. If they do then it > seems like they could incorporate Livecode open > source to develope similar features in xCode. > If apple were to do that,

Re: android sdk fyi

Thanks Mike! +1 Kind regards, Mark Schonewille http://economy-x-talk.com https://www.facebook.com/marksch Buy the most extensive book on the LiveCode language: http://livecodebeginner.economy-x-talk.com Op 07-Jul-16 om 14:47 schreef Mike Bonner: I recently started working with android again,

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

I doubt this is any use for what you need, but strangely, setting the liveResizing of the stack to false does exit fullscreen mode, although the stack grows in height by 22px! Paul > On Jul 22, 2016, at 3:35 PM, Scott Rossi wrote: > > I eventually figured out the

copy/paste on mobile?

The Dict says copy can be used with chunk expressions to copy text from a LiveCode field to the mobile OS clipboard, but I'm having no luck getting it to work. Is that working for you folks, or is the Dictionary wrong? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

Thanks, good to know. Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, UX/UI Design On 7/22/16, 3:29 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Monte Goulding" wrote: >Here it is

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

I eventually figured out the stack's decorations were hidden behind the LiveCode toolbar (and the green button was changed to grey an OS version or two back). But I'm still wondering if there's a command to exit the OS's fullscreen mode without making the menubar visible, like how most apps

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

When the stack is maximized using the window decorations, setting the fullscreen to false doesn't revert the stack back to its original dimensions unless the fullScreen was enabled to begin with. But manually setting the stack's dimensions can resize/reposition it. Thanks & Regards, Scott Rossi

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

Here it is http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=16946 Sent from my iPhone > On 23 Jul 2016, at 8:19 AM, Monte Goulding wrote: > > I have a bug report open about this. Apple decided to just change the way > windows worked in 10.11 and this has caused a number of

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

I have a bug report open about this. Apple decided to just change the way windows worked in 10.11 and this has caused a number of issues we need to resolve. For the moment you can't script a way out of fullscreen mode so you need to use the widget again at the top of the screen. Cheers Monte

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

You mouse over the top of the screen, and the menu and titlebar will appear. Then click the green button to come out of full screen mode. Same thing works for all other Mac windows. > On Jul 22, 2016, at 6:05 PM, Scott Rossi wrote: > > OK, on OS X 10.11 I decided to

Re: UN-FullScreen a Stack?

> On Jul 22, 2016, at 4:05 PM, Scott Rossi wrote: > > OK, on OS X 10.11 I decided to see what happens when maximizing a stack. > The window went fullscreen and my script for repositioning controls works > great, but now the display is stuck in fullscreen mode. How do I

UN-FullScreen a Stack?

OK, on OS X 10.11 I decided to see what happens when maximizing a stack. The window went fullscreen and my script for repositioning controls works great, but now the display is stuck in fullscreen mode. How do I get the view back to multi-window view? Setting the width/height of the stack

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

Around a year or so ago I read Apple was thinking of making xCode open source. If they do then it seems like they could incorporate Livecode open source to develope similar features in xCode. With their money, attorneys, and laws in different countries they can pretty much use what they want.

Re: [ANN] Updates to LiveCode's platform support policy

Being a naive user I created a new stack with LC 8.0.1 and scripted it: on resizestack set rect of widget "browser" to the rect of this card end resizestack Then dragged the browser widget to the stack, pasted http://livecode.com/updated-platform-support-policy/ into the URL-field and

Re: [ANN] Updates to LiveCode's platform support policy

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Roger Eller wrote: > In Chrome on Yosemite, clicking OSX opens the Linux list. OSX list will > not open. Works fine in Safari. > > ~Roger > ​For me on Safari, changing from one accordion entry to a lower one scrolls up the content

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

On 22/07/2016 18:57, Mark Talluto wrote: On Jul 22, 2016, at 9:07 AM, Peter TB Brett wrote: If someone wants to try out LiveCode with a view to making closed-source software, they can register for a free trial of LiveCode Indy here: https://livecode.com/trial/

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

> On Jul 22, 2016, at 9:07 AM, Peter TB Brett wrote: > > If someone wants to try out LiveCode with a view to making closed-source > software, they can register for a free trial of LiveCode Indy here: > https://livecode.com/trial/ Very cool! This should go a long way

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

@ kevin Thanks for your careful attention to this. I am clearly out of my depth on licensing issues and have a naively, simplistic look at things. I do want to go on record that I am and always will be "on your side"…. if I were the CFO of Livecode and looked at a graph A) community

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

Hi folks, We do review our licensing from time to time and I will at some point look again at whether we can clarify this further or introduce changes that make it clearer to our end users. I¹m not a lawyer and until this stuff gets tested in court it seems hard to say what will and won¹t stand

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

For the WE, you might find these links on the issue of applying copyright to programming languages, informative : Can Copyright Protect a Language? Google beats Oracle—Android

Possible to use a mobile printer?

Is is possible for LiveCode to communicate with a bluetooth mobile printer on Android? I have a Star Micronics SM-T300 Mobile Printer and would like to use LiveCode to print to it but have no idea where to even begin. Thanks, _ /-\ ndrew ___

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

Mark - Thank you for taking the time to write up your views on the distinctions between LiveCode Ltd's interpretation of the GPL and those of the Drupal, Wordpress, and Joomla projects. I'm quoting it here in its entirety because I believe it's worth a second read; IMO it represents some of

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

I also don't see anything wrong with the GPL license being attached to LC community. i've although thought it was a great way to differentiate. And i find absolutely right and positive that any standalone built with the community version be under GPL, as far as the code is concerned. But, having

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

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

On 22/07/2016 16:53, Rick Harrison wrote: 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

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

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

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

Hi Mark, 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

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

Hi Kay! i'm "stunned" when I read this sentence : > LiveCode the language, just like the AppleScript language, is > proprietary subject to license terms and conditions. It would be helpful if you could precise your source, thanks Is that an extract from the LC license? It would also be

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, 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

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: > It is important to understand that the Company's (LC) 'intention' can > NOT deviate from the GPL v3 legal requirements which the FSF will > enforce, i.e. just because the Company (LC) would like to interpret a >

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 >

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

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

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

Kay C Lan wrote: ... > wrote: >> Apple's walled garden is not a fertile pasture for growing Free >> Software. >> If you want to make Free Software apps for mobile devices, target >> Android. > > Hmm, I think this is a common misconception of the situation. Apple is > more than happy to

[ANN] DatePicker for LiveCode LC8 update

DatePicker for LiveCode A free update has been released that is LC8 compatible. You can download Build 33 from... www.FlexibleLearning.com/datepicker and see the What's New page here... www.flexiblelearning.com/datepicker/versioning/whatsnew.htm Note that DatePicker is not compatible with

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

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Erik Beugelaar wrote: > Working as a hired consultant in many teams with colleague developers I have > never met one developer who did not "steal" some code from whatever resource > (internet, books etc) to use it in a project that's needs to

Re: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote: > > "Apple's walled garden is not a fertile pasture for growing Free Software. " > > ?? there are 10's of thousands of free apps in the app store. How is that an > "unfertile pasture?" > You started so well

RE: Licensing AGAIN [was: Sharing FontLab Plugin]

Working as a hired consultant in many teams with colleague developers I have never met one developer who did not "steal" some code from whatever resource (internet, books etc) to use it in a project that's needs to get done. Every developer looks around to prevent inventing the wheel again over