Hello Tim
Yes !
We probably all have !
My last try was yesterday !
This is the response I got one months ago:
Ticket#201205091326
Hello Rolf,
Hopefully I will be tackling this issue with revOnline soon, but unfortunately
I
can't give you any estimate or assurances
On 21/06/12 10:20, Rolf Kocherhans wrote:
Hello Tim
Yes !
We probably all have !
My last try was yesterday !
This is the response I got one months ago:
Ticket#201205091326
Hello Rolf,
Hopefully I will be tackling this issue with revOnline soon, but unfortunately I
Richmond wrote:
I would characterise RunRev as a company that produces a super
product, but is signally bad at follow-up with bug reports and
maintenance of components (such as Rev-Online and RevNet)...
To clarify, RevNet is not a product of RunRev Ltd., but was created and
is maintained by
Not what I meant - it's easy to miss reports in a feedback system. I was
asking if you've contacted one of the staff directly. Much harder to miss such
a request.
Tim
On Jun 20, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
Yes, but even if they had not, they posted to the quality center which is
Alex Tweedly wrote:
On 20/06/2012 15:49, Richard Gaskin wrote:
On-Rev is still in business as a shared hosting alternative with
RevServer preinstalled, and RevServer itself is kinda nifty and also
remains available, currently at v5.0.1 (understandable that it's not
using 5.5 since most of the
Alex Tweedly wrote:
On 20/06/2012 01:23, Richard Gaskin wrote:
In LiveCode, see Development-Plugins-GoRevNet, and once there see
the Stacks section.
RevNet was the first community-based stack sharing service, later
somewhat displaced by the advent of RevOnline two years later.
It all still
On 06/21/2012 05:55 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Richmond wrote:
I would characterise RunRev as a company that produces a super
product, but is signally bad at follow-up with bug reports and
maintenance of components (such as Rev-Online and RevNet)...
To clarify, RevNet is not a product of
Richmond wrote:
Nothing is intrinsically wrong with RevNet, it is just very out-of-date.
Agreed. It could use some pruning of the stacks it has access to, and a
freshened appearance.
Those and more are on my to-do list, but client work pays for that so I
must continue to give priority to
On 06/20/2012 04:02 AM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Alex, Richard-
Yes, but... three things:
it wouldn't have the authority of the company behind it, in the way
that the Apple store, etc does
I don't recall a link from the runrev site to LiveCode Journal, or
it's somewhere out of the way.
it would
On 06/20/2012 09:01 AM, Andre Garzia wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Peter Haworthp...@lcsql.com wrote:
I have several QCC reports that have been sitting in silence for several
weeks
Weeks??? I have pet bugs that have been sitting there for YEARS
For example:
* Can't take
Richmond-
Tuesday, June 19, 2012, 11:17:43 PM, you wrote:
One of my least favourite words on this user-list is Work-around, and
Well, that point I may take issue with. If there's a problem with the
engine or IDE or somesuch and there does exist a workaround, then I'm
less frantic about the bug
Mark Wieder wrote:
...
it would look really bad for the company to have this added as Yet
Another Failed Runrev Initiative.
I'm not clear what you mean, Mark: would it look bad to provide a
community-based solution for sharing stack files?
I like to imagine a future in which RunRev
Le 20 juin 2012 à 17:07, Richard Gaskin a écrit :
Similarly, community-oriented tools like RevOnline could conceivably become
community-driven. Portions of the IDE as well.
YES !
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please
Richard-
Well, I'm not disagreeing with anything you said there. I just don't
see any third-party options having the traction needed to make this
work. Look at the usage differences between the runrev web forum and
the LiveJournal web forum, for instance. It's not a matter of what
content is
Richard-
You are, I think, missing the point. The issue is more about
announcing a new initiative, getting users started down that path, and
then abandoning things.
When was the last time the broken on-rev client got updated? I can't
imagine anyone on the team taking the time to revisit this.
I don't mean to play Obvious Man here, but has anyone actually contacted
Heather, et al and asked for it to be fixed?
Tim
On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Richard-
You are, I think, missing the point. The issue is more about
announcing a new initiative, getting users
Yes, but even if they had not, they posted to the quality center which is
actually where they are supposed to. They are saying that no response has come
to those posts. It would be better if someone came back and said, We really do
not have time at present to address this issue. or else, We
On 20/06/2012 01:23, Richard Gaskin wrote:
In LiveCode, see Development-Plugins-GoRevNet, and once there see
the Stacks section.
RevNet was the first community-based stack sharing service, later
somewhat displaced by the advent of RevOnline two years later.
It all still works, and I would
On 20/06/2012 15:49, Richard Gaskin wrote:
On-Rev is still in business as a shared hosting alternative with
RevServer preinstalled, and RevServer itself is kinda nifty and also
remains available, currently at v5.0.1 (understandable that it's not
using 5.5 since most of the additions are for
Andre-
Tuesday, June 19, 2012, 11:01:09 PM, you wrote:
Weeks??? I have pet bugs that have been sitting there for YEARS
I just looked, and my earliest still-waiting-to-be-confirmed bug
report is from early 2004.
--
-Mark Wieder
mwie...@ahsoftware.net
RevOnline has been effectively broken for a long time. Long enough that
we should be able to predict that it won't be fixed any time soon.
And I think that's probably a good resource allocation decision for runrev.
revonline is basically a website to collect stacks and similar
resources,
Alex Tweedly wrote:
RevOnline has been effectively broken for a long time. Long enough that
we should be able to predict that it won't be fixed any time soon.
And I think that's probably a good resource allocation decision for runrev.
revonline is basically a website to collect stacks and
Alex, Richard-
Yes, but... three things:
it wouldn't have the authority of the company behind it, in the way
that the Apple store, etc does
I don't recall a link from the runrev site to LiveCode Journal, or
it's somewhere out of the way.
it would look really bad for the company to have this
Hi Mark,
I'd have more sympathy for all that if the many QCC reports on the issue
had received a response of some sort, even if it was Sorry guys, we know
it's broken but it's not a high enough priority for us to fix right now.
Mine never received a response, not sure if any did.
I have several
On 06/20/2012 03:01 AM, Alex Tweedly wrote:
RevOnline has been effectively broken for a long time. Long enough
that we should be able to predict that it won't be fixed any time soon.
And I think that's probably a good resource allocation decision for
runrev.
revonline is basically a
25 matches
Mail list logo
