I could have sired a child who was just now graduating high school! :-)
Bob S
> On Oct 3, 2021, at 09:16 , Mark Wieder via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> On 9/30/21 7:02 AM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote:
>
>> - a "require" or "include" mechanism for dependencies in libraries
>
> LOL.
On 9/30/21 7:02 AM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote:
- a "require" or "include" mechanism for dependencies in libraries
LOL. That request is now some 17 years old.
https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1712
--
Mark Wieder
ahsoftw...@gmail.com
er
On Sep 30, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
wrote:
On 30/09/2021 15:02, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote:
On 06/09/2021 15:14, Kevin Miller via use-livecode wrote:
Upgrading this could be a very useful project. There is a lot of content in
there but it has the issues you
>> Roger
>>
>>> On Sep 30, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 30/09/2021 15:02, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote:
>>>> On 06/09/2021 15:14, Kevin Miller via use-livecode wrote:
>>>&
ly via use-livecode wrote:
>>>> On 06/09/2021 15:14, Kevin Miller via use-livecode wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Upgrading this could be a very useful project. There is a lot of content
>>>>> in there but it has the issues you list.
>>> So I had
a very useful project. There is a lot of content in
there but it has the issues you list.
So I had a look at what could be done just within the IDE for revonline. There's an old joke about
a tourist in Ireland who realizes she(*) is lost, and ask for directions from an old farmer at the
side of the
>
>>>> Upgrading this could be a very useful project. There is a lot of content
>>>> in there but it has the issues you list.
>>
>> So I had a look at what could be done just within the IDE for revonline.
>> There's an old joke about a tourist in Ireland wh
ia use-livecode wrote:
>>
>>> Upgrading this could be a very useful project. There is a lot of content in
>>> there but it has the issues you list.
>
> So I had a look at what could be done just within the IDE for revonline.
> There's an old joke about a tour
for revonline.
There's an old joke about a tourist in Ireland who realizes she(*) is
lost, and ask for directions from an old farmer at the side of the road.
"Well", says he, "if I wanted to go there, I wouldn't start from here."
I found the revonline scripts rather complex, a
er ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Develop Yourself
On 06/09/2021, 14:11, "use-livecode on behalf of Alex Tweedly via use-livecode"
wrote:
In the main thread, I mentioned that I found revOnline (aka "Sample
Stacks"), but didn't say ho
use-livecode" wrote:
In the main thread, I mentioned that I found revOnline (aka "Sample
Stacks"), but didn't say how or why. Here the answer to that ...
It has:
- no differentiation between 'libraries' and 'examples'
- it has no support for script-only sta
In the main thread, I mentioned that I found revOnline (aka "Sample
Stacks"), but didn't say how or why. Here the answer to that ...
It has:
- no differentiation between 'libraries' and 'examples'
- it has no support for script-only stacks, which is surely the way most
libraries wi
Hi folks,
Recently I built a plugin that helped me stop beating my head against
the wall quite so often. It lets me compare the script of a stack I'm
editing to a copy on disk, and yields 100% accurate results in a very
usable format. I just uploaded it to RevOnline. Here is the write-up
On Jul 14, 2014, at 12:15 PM, Charles E Buchwald wrote:
I know this is just one more complaint about how broken RevOnline is... But
it would be _really_ nice if it worked again.
I just spent 45 minutes figuring out that when you use the revZip external,
you sometimes have to enclose your
On 27/07/14 17:01, Peter M. Brigham
snip
(Sorry, like Richmond, I am not using LC 6.x for most of what I do, since that
would involve updating 32,000 lines of script.)
That is slightly misleading:
My commercial ventures (such as they are: gross income for 2014 = 20
Euros) are all made
On Jul 27, 2014, I wrote:
OK, here's a quick-and-dirty plugin called LCdictPlugin. Pop it into your
plugins folder and restart LC.
Forgot to say, make sure the plugin is set to open at LC startup.
-- Peter
Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com
http://home.comcast.net/~pmbrig
Peter M. Brigham wrote:
(Sorry, like Richmond, I am not using LC 6.x for most of what I
do, since that would involve updating 32,000 lines of script.)
I must have missed something, as I've been happily working away in v6
without ever noticing that my old code wasn't supposed to work.
Can
On 27/07/14 17:27, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Peter M. Brigham wrote:
(Sorry, like Richmond, I am not using LC 6.x for most of what I
do, since that would involve updating 32,000 lines of script.)
I must have missed something, as I've been happily working away in v6
without ever noticing that my
On Jul 27, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Peter M. Brigham wrote:
(Sorry, like Richmond, I am not using LC 6.x for most of what I
do, since that would involve updating 32,000 lines of script.)
I must have missed something, as I've been happily working away in v6 without
ever
On 27/07/14 17:38, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
On Jul 27, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Peter M. Brigham wrote:
(Sorry, like Richmond, I am not using LC 6.x for most of what I
do, since that would involve updating 32,000 lines of script.)
I must have missed something, as I've been
My stacks are not password protected, I just have an ask password barrier to
accessing the data. I may be misremembering, so that may not have been the
problem. I just recall being blocked at the outset and deciding not to bother
running anything beyond 5.5.1. At some point I'll try it again.
On 27/07/14 18:00, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
My stacks are not password protected, I just have an ask password barrier to
accessing the data. I may be misremembering, so that may not have been the
problem. I just recall being blocked at the outset and deciding not to bother
running anything
On Jul 27, 2014, I wrote:
OK, here's a quick-and-dirty plugin called LCdictPlugin. Pop it into your
plugins folder and restart LC.
I realized that with my original plugin it's impossible to tell if you have a
user note for a given dictionary entry without checking each entry every time
with
On Jul 27, 2014, I wrote:
OK, here's a quick-and-dirty plugin called LCdictPlugin. Pop it into your
plugins folder and restart LC.
I realized that with my original plugin it's impossible to tell if you have a
user note for a given dictionary entry without checking each entry every time
with
Thanks for this Peter, installed and working fine.
I added a couple of things to it
- saving the htmltext of the note into the array so simple formatting is
maintained
- An index of all the user notes in alpha order, accessible by shift
clicking the user note pseudo button.
Pete
lcSQL Software
Whoops, pressed send too soon.
How can I get this version to you/the list?
Also, I think your array may need to have an extra level of key for the
entry type (command, property, etc) since there are multiple entries in the
dictionary for the same term in some cases (e.g hilite is a command and a
Hello Peter,
I went to your link below.
I see what appears to be a LiveCode stack.
Do I have to compile that before I put in the plugins folder?
Sorry, I'm a VERY newbie.
Thanks,
Larry
OK, here's a quick-and-dirty plugin called LCdictPlugin. Pop it into
your plugins folder and restart LC.
I
On Jul 27, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
Whoops, pressed send too soon.
How can I get this version to you/the list?
Also, I think your array may need to have an extra level of key for the
entry type (command, property, etc) since there are multiple entries in the
dictionary for
On Jul 27, 2014, at 2:21 PM, la...@significantplanet.org wrote:
Hello Peter,
I went to your link below.
I see what appears to be a LiveCode stack.
Do I have to compile that before I put in the plugins folder?
Sorry, I'm a VERY newbie.
No, just drop it into your plugins folder and restart
On 7/27/2014, 1:31 PM, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
On the Mac these days the plugins folder is within the LiveCode app
package (LiveCode xxx.app/Contents/Tools/Plugins/). On Windows the
plugins folder should be visible with no hassle.
That folder is meant only for the plugins that ship with
On Jul 27, 2014, at 3:05 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
On 7/27/2014, 1:31 PM, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
On the Mac these days the plugins folder is within the LiveCode app
package (LiveCode xxx.app/Contents/Tools/Plugins/). On Windows the
plugins folder should be visible with no hassle.
That
On Jul 27, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
Whoops, pressed send too soon.
How can I get this version to you/the list?
Also, I think your array may need to have an extra level of key for the
entry type (command, property, etc) since there are multiple entries in the
dictionary for
OK, thanks Peter.
I'll wait for the improvements.
Larry
- Original Message -
From: Peter M. Brigham pmb...@gmail.com
To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: RevOnline User Comments in the Dictionary
On Jul 27, 2014
.
Larry
- Original Message - From: Peter M. Brigham pmb...@gmail.com
To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: RevOnline User Comments in the Dictionary
On Jul 27, 2014, at 2:21 PM, la...@significantplanet.org wrote
I know this is just one more complaint about how broken RevOnline is... But it
would be _really_ nice if it worked again.
I just spent 45 minutes figuring out that when you use the revZip external, you
sometimes have to enclose your variable names in quotes. As usual I searched
the list
Charles E Buchwald wrote:
I know this is just one more complaint about how broken RevOnline
is... But it would be _really_ nice if it worked again.
There's a project in the IDE Contributors section of the forum for
improving RevOnline:
http://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=67t=20566
Thanks for the update, Richard.
On 14 Jul 2014, at 11:44 AM, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote:
Charles E Buchwald wrote:
I know this is just one more complaint about how broken RevOnline
is... But it would be _really_ nice if it worked again.
There's a project in the IDE
What's going on with revOnline when accessed from the IDE, Developer menu? I'm
trying to download Richard's property inspector and it seems to hang. I try to
log in and it won't recognize my password, and won't try to reset my password.
Fortunately, the web site version works fine.
Bill
In revOnline window, from LC 6.6.0 dp-1,
it is hanging the entire app.
I get the following error message when i do an Apple-period command:
-
The following server error was encountered
Hi William,
see Bug 11387 in Quality Control Center
http://quality.runrev.com/show_bug.cgi?id=11387
It seems to be a rather nasty problem since it is not always reproducible.
Although I experience what you describe every time.
Kind regards
Bernd
--
View this message in context:
Bernd:
It's a pity. I was trying to download Richard Gaskin's prop inspector, but
can't find it on the web site.
Anyway, I've gotta get back to some productive work.
Best,
bill
William Prothero
http://es.earthednet.org
On Mar 4, 2014, at 12:40 PM, BNig bernd.niggem...@uni-wh.de wrote:
Hi
prothero wrote:
I was trying to download Richard Gaskin's prop inspector, but can't find it on
the web site.
4W Props is in RevNet, which predates RevOnline by a couple years (and
has unfortunately proven more reliable).
RevNet is accessible within the LC IDE through its bundled plugin
I know RunRev have some amazingly talented people available to them but
fixing the day beats it all!
RevOnline seems to be OK again with 5.5.4.
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote:
Maybe there was a problem
next week. :)
RevOnline seems to be OK again with 5.5.4.
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net
wrote:
Maybe there was a problem earlier in the day that got fixed?
Er... that should read maybe the *problem* got
On 10/2/13 11:49 AM, Roger Eller wrote:
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote:
I know RunRev have some amazingly talented people available to them but
fixing the day beats it all!
RunRev is *obviously* harnessing the power of time travel from a stack by
J.
Jacque-
Wednesday, October 2, 2013, 12:04:19 PM, you wrote:
I wish I could get it to access next year reliably. There's some
features I need.
That's easy. Just wait until a day after next year.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
Kay-
Tuesday, October 1, 2013, 6:38:08 PM, you wrote:
No, the day was definitely broken but after that post it's much better now.
That must be why they call it daybreak.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
use-livecode mailing list
On 10/2/13 2:59 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Kay-
Tuesday, October 1, 2013, 6:38:08 PM, you wrote:
No, the day was definitely broken but after that post it's much better now.
That must be why they call it daybreak.
You came out of your corner, didn't you.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay |
Jacque-
Wednesday, October 2, 2013, 1:10:25 PM, you wrote:
You came out of your corner, didn't you.
Nuthin' but the groundhog in me
(Bow-wow-wow yippee-yo yippee-yay)
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
use-livecode mailing list
Why must you always chase the cat?
Regards,
Scott Rossi
Creative Director
Tactile Media, UX/UI Design
On 10/2/13 6:48 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote:
Jacque-
Wednesday, October 2, 2013, 1:10:25 PM, you wrote:
You came out of your corner, didn't you.
Nuthin' but the
revOnline appears to be completely dead - searching doesn't work and
clicking a keyword does nothing either. Anyone having the same experience?
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please
On 10/01/2013 05:38 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
revOnline appears to be completely dead - searching doesn't work and
clicking a keyword does nothing either. Anyone having the same experience?
Pete
All these functions seem to be working normally here in LC 6.1.1 and 6.5dp1.
Warren
Thanks, yes they work OK in 6.1.1. I guess I'll have to stop using 5.5.4
which is where I came across the problem.
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Warren Samples war...@warrensweb.us wrote:
On 10/01/2013 05:38 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
revOnline
Pete-
Tuesday, October 1, 2013, 4:55:06 PM, you wrote:
Thanks, yes they work OK in 6.1.1. I guess I'll have to stop using 5.5.4
which is where I came across the problem.
Working for me here with 5.5.4.
Maybe there was a problem earlier in the day that got fixed?
--
-Mark Wieder
Maybe there was a problem earlier in the day that got fixed?
Er... that should read maybe the *problem* got fixed, not the day...
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this
No, the day was definitely broken but after that post it's much better now.
Thanks ;-)
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote:
Maybe there was a problem earlier in the day that got fixed?
Er... that should read maybe the *problem* got fixed, not the day...
:) Yes Monte, I do. I expect them to use it - according to the clearly defined
terms of the accompanying license. LiveCode's IDE has always been open and
available for people to use, copy and learn from.
I guess I shouldn't post late in the evening without due thought and
consideration. I
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 ;-)
--
M E R Goulding
Software development services
mergExt - There's an external for that!
On 02/08/2013, at 5:16 PM,
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
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
Hi Robert,
I would think that it is clear to users that sharing code (rather than
stacks) in the code section of RevOnline, implies that people can use it
to learn from. Copying and using it would violate copyright, but
studying the code and reverse-engineering it would be a form of fair
use
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
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
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
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
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Richard Gaskin
ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote:
Dr. Hawkins wrote:
As the author of the seminal Economic paper on the subject, I chose
viral and public quite deliberately.
That's certainly your right, or anyone's right, regardless of any academic
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Mark Schonewille
m.schonewi...@economy-x-talk.com wrote:
I would think that it is clear to users that sharing code (rather than
stacks) in the code section of RevOnline, implies that people can use it to
learn from. Copying and using it would violate copyright
works. Can't do that
without violating the copyright.
So that practice of using revOnline as a source of inspiration should not
break copyright rules???
Inspiration, yes. Code, no.
--
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq.
(702) 508-8462
___
use-livecode
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Kevin Miller ke...@runrev.com 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
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Mark Wilcox m_p_wil...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
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.
If they don't contain *any* code, I agree. If I designed
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
On 08/01/2013 03:56 PM, 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
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
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
This is just awful and freudian at the same time. I did a double-take when
I read the subject this time, because for a second I thought it was
revOnline and Open Sores
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Mark Wilcox m_p_wil...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Richmond wrote:
If copyright is not explicitly
I'm in favor of a statement making it clear what the conditions for
uploading stacks to revOnline are. I'm not in favor of allowing those
terms to be overriden by people setting their own licensing terms on a
stack by stack basis.
The whole point of revOnline is to freely and openly share code
I totally agree with you :: things should be simple. Simple for us, simple
for th experimented commercial developer helping us out, simple for Kevin,
simple for the 12 yrs old newcomer, simple and clear for everybody :=
revOnline =equals= freely shared no strings attached. Full point.
I believe
On 08/01/2013 07:34 PM, Mike Kerner wrote:
This is just awful and freudian at the same time. I did a double-take when
I read the subject this time, because for a second I thought it was
revOnline and Open Sores
LOL! The whole thing does look a bit like an Open Sore.
Richmond
it's not the site, it was just the title of the thread and the strong
reaction it seems to evoke. I don't use revOnline, so I can't comment on
it.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.comwrote:
On 08/01/2013 07:34 PM, Mike Kerner wrote:
This is just awful
On 08/01/2013 09:25 PM, Mike Kerner wrote:
it's not the site, it was just the title of the thread and the strong
reaction it seems to evoke. I don't use revOnline, so I can't comment on
it.
Well, I started the thread, and the reaction was both amazing, and, I
believe, healthy; surely
as part of the upload process with the
option to enter your own. The chosen license is then displayed where you might
download the stack. All current stacks just get listed as unspecified license
until owners update them.
This whole topic has made me wonder if revOnline handles password protected
On 02/08/2013, at 2:58 AM, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote:
The whole point of revOnline is to freely and openly share code with no
strings attached. If that's not what you want to do, then you should find
a location that is more appropriate to your objectives.
Hmm... Mark Wieder said he
Call me naive but.. if you don't want to share your code, why on earth would
you upload it to revOnline? Its kinda like painting a picture, hanging it on
the wall, and then telling folks, hey, thats my picture, don't look at it!
I've nothing against people protecting their code if they want
On 02/08/2013, at 6:40 AM, Heather Laine heat...@runrev.com wrote:
I've nothing against people protecting their code if they want to. It's
theirs. But if they upload it, openly, to a shared site… what do they expect
people to do with it?
You do realise that all of RunRev's IP is openly
On 02/08/2013, at 12:25 AM, 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
Heather Laine wrote:
Call me naive but.. if you don't want to share your code, why on
earth would you upload it to revOnline?
There may be many reasons:
- The stack may be a tutorial, and while the code techniques it
describes may be shareable there may be libraries or other code driving
On 08/01/2013 11:40 PM, Heather Laine wrote:
Call me naive but.. if you don't want to share your code, why on earth would
you upload it to revOnline? Its kinda like painting a picture, hanging it on
the wall, and then telling folks, hey, thats my picture, don't look at it!
I've nothing
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Heather Laine heat...@runrev.com wrote:
Call me naive but.. if you don't want to share your code, why on earth
would you upload it to revOnline? Its kinda like painting a picture,
hanging it on the wall, and then telling folks, hey, thats my picture,
don't look
Why is it so complicate nowadays to remain simple ?
Jacques
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
Read Simplexity by Jeoffrey Kluger
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Jacques Hausser jacques.haus...@unil.chwrote:
Why is it so complicate nowadays to remain simple ?
Jacques
___
use-livecode mailing
...or Wrong by David Freedman. Slightly different focus - it's about why
experts are very frequently wrong.
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Jacques Hausser jacques.haus...@unil.chwrote:
Why is it so complicate nowadays to remain simple ?
Jacques
, why on earth would
you upload it to revOnline? Its kinda like painting a picture, hanging it on
the wall, and then telling folks, hey, thats my picture, don't look at it!
I've nothing against people protecting their code if they want to. It's
theirs. But if they upload it, openly
of the author is not specified in the stack,
then it'll be hard to argue against common knowledge.
Clearly it would simplify to be able to add at the publication step a
corresponding OSS declaration.
I strangely assumed so far that contributions at revOnline were for the
common good, thus freely
Hi Robert,
Anonymous works are still copyrighted by the anonymous author. If the
author ever decides to reveal him/herself, he can claim this copyright.
Contributions to RevOnline are not anonymous. If need be, they can be
traced back to an account and a user. This makes it easier to claim
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 6:49 AM, Robert Mann r...@free.fr wrote:
On the frontier :: if the name of the author is not specified in the stack,
then it'll be hard to argue against common knowledge.
That just isn't the law.
Not in the US, and AFAIK, not any country subscribing to the Berne
at revOnline were for the
common good, thus freely re-usable common knowledge. Are there any other
folks around who though so?
yes; Me!
Richmond.
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/revOnline-and-Open-Source-tp4668100p4668171.html
Sent from the Revolution
Hi,
Yes, the license of the community version does infect executables built with
it, but not automatically. The author still has to include the license with the
software and if s/he doesn't do that, copright applies automatically and the
author would be violating LiveCode's open source
Dr. Hawkins wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 6:49 AM, Robert Mann rman at free.fr wrote:
On the frontier :: if the name of the author is not specified in the stack,
then it'll be hard to argue against common knowledge.
That just isn't the law.
Not in the US, and AFAIK, not any country
Copyright Law aside, Isn't revOnline a place to openly 'share' code with other
users. In fact what other purpose does revOnline perform? Doesn't the idea of
sharing code openly in a public space enough to declare it as public? Or is
that presuming too much?
Tom
-- Tom McGrath III
http
Thomas McGrath III wrote:
Copyright Law aside, Isn't revOnline a place to openly 'share' code
with other users. In fact what other purpose does revOnline perform?
Doesn't the idea of sharing code openly in a public space enough to
declare it as public? Or is that presuming too much?
Sharing
1 - 100 of 282 matches
Mail list logo
