Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
I tried that but I don't keep Xcode in the root of the Applications folder and the stack gave a warning. When I moved it there, the Xcode commands couldn't find it because I'd set the Xcode default to a copy in a subfolder. Maybe a future update can determine the user's Xcode location. I have

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread matthias rebbe via use-livecode
Couldn't you search for the ASC provider in the helper stack pressing the "Loupe" icon in the general settings? - Matthias Rebbe Life Is Too Short For Boring Code > Am 14.04.2021 um 01:12 schrieb J. Landman Gay via use-livecode > : > > Cool. Thanks. I do keep NotarizationHelper in my

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
Cool. Thanks. I do keep NotarizationHelper in my plugins folder since I use it frequently. I probably will continue with the manual method for a while though, since I have three different apps to notarize and I have to update the General settings each time. Maybe later I'll revise your script

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread matthias rebbe via use-livecode
Jacque, and if put the that NotarizerHelperStack into the plugins folder and if you add the below code to your stack script then you can directly code sign and notarize the created macOS standalone right after it was built. ;) on standaloneSaved pFolderSavedIn if the

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
On 4/13/21 10:43 AM, Keith Martin via use-livecode wrote: On 13 Apr 2021, at 11:28, Andre Garzia via use-livecode wrote: On the other hand, I think that the SB should create standalones that can actually be deployed, this means that it should be able to handle notarisation on the mac

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread Keith Martin via use-livecode
> On 13 Apr 2021, at 11:28, Andre Garzia via use-livecode > wrote: > > On the other hand, I think that the SB should create standalones that can > actually be deployed, this means that it should be able to handle > notarisation on the mac out-of-the-box. Oh boy, THIS! And everything

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread Ken Ray via use-livecode
> On Apr 13, 2021, at 5:28 AM, Andre Garzia via use-livecode > wrote: > > I like all that I read here. There are things that are really hard when > building standalone apps that I don’t think should be handled by LC HQ, such > as “adding AppleScript dictionary” to your app. This is harder

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-04-13 Thread Andre Garzia via use-livecode
I like all that I read here. There are things that are really hard when building standalone apps that I don’t think should be handled by LC HQ, such as “adding AppleScript dictionary” to your app. This is harder than it seems and it involves plist manipulation, fancy sdef xml creation, etc.

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-31 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
My apologies to everyone! The LC Lesson that Heather referred us to does indeed work in Big Sur as well. My mistake was thinking that the “Open Anyway” in the System Prefs never appears in Big Sur. But it certainly does . . . after clicking “OK” on the first dialog box. Thanks to Bob Earp for

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-31 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Here is the Forums entry: > https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=19=35653 > Thanks, Roger > On Mar 31, 2021, at 8:49 AM, Roger Guay via use-livecode > wrote: > > Many thanks Heather and Scott for these lessons. Unfortunately they

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-31 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
Who could object to an app named Testeroni? I wish I'd thought of it. Thanks also for the lesson, now we have something to point to if the issue comes up again. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On March 31, 2021 6:01:38

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-31 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Many thanks Heather and Scott for these lessons. Unfortunately they don’t apply to OS Big Sur. In fact, it was because I initially thought that apple closed this door to opening standalones (SA) in Big Sur that I raised the alarm here. Turns out the process in Big Sur is even easier, involving

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-31 Thread Mark Smith via use-livecode
Wonderful, thanks for posting! Mark > On Mar 31, 2021, at 11:59 AM, Heather Laine via use-livecode > wrote: > > I thought at this point, I could make a useful contribution to this thread: > >

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-31 Thread Heather Laine via use-livecode
I thought at this point, I could make a useful contribution to this thread: https://lessons.livecode.com/m/4071/l/1386097-i-get-a-warning-about-malicious-software-when-opening-a-livecode-standalone-on-mac

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-30 Thread Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
Shouldn’t we just as a global initiative focus on finding “bad” people, and making them pay dearly for effing up everything in the entire world or holding us hostage? Ah, but that would mean that world powers would have to give up their own e-espionage programs, and you can hold your breath on

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Hi James, I downloaded MKVtoolsNix and it opens on the second right-click. As for my wife’s admin privileges, I will have to check later Thanks very much Roger > On Mar 29, 2021, at 4:43 PM, james--- via use-livecode > wrote: > > Hi Roger, > > Below is a link to the download page for

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Well, the thought plickins. I just also tried to open another standalone from Bob Earp and it failed to open. I am back to my usual state of befuddlement! Roger > On Mar 29, 2021, at 6:02 PM, Dev via use-livecode > wrote: > > No Roger, the folder has nothing to do with it. The two right

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Dev via use-livecode
No Roger, the folder has nothing to do with it. The two right click process will work wherever you unzip the new arrival. Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 29, 2021, at 5:54 PM, Roger Guay via use-livecode > wrote: > > Thanks for your kind offer, Alex, but I think the process of opening an >

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Thanks for your kind offer, Alex, but I think the process of opening an unblessed standalone for OS 11 has been solved. See my previous post in response to Scott. Turns out to be fairly simple . . . at least for this iteration of OS. In short, just right-click 2 times. It may also be important

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread james--- via use-livecode
Hi Roger, Below is a link to the download page for MkvToolnix, an app for packaging/modifying mkv files. It is not notarised and requires the steps we have been suggesting to open (after copying it to your local machine from the distribution disk image.)

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Great Scott! (How often do you hear that?) This works on second attempt but not the first. I verified this by trashing the first unzipped app and unzipping a second as you suggest. Here are the details: On first right-click - Open, I got “"Testeroni” can’t be opened because Apple cannot check

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread scott--- via use-livecode
That symbol probably means it was compiled to run on an older (Motorola ?) processor… similar to what happens if you have a 32 bit app on Big Sur. — Scott > On Mar 29, 2021, at 3:29 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode > wrote: > > > On 29/03/2021 22:11, Roger Guay via use-livecode wrote: >>

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread scott--- via use-livecode
Oops, meant to send that off-list. — Scott > On Mar 29, 2021, at 3:33 PM, scott--- via use-livecode > wrote: > > Hello Roger, > > I made a standalone from an empty stack (and one button that does nothing.) > It is 64 bit Mac. It is zipped. It isn’t in a DMG or any sort of installer. > It

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread scott--- via use-livecode
Hello Roger, I made a standalone from an empty stack (and one button that does nothing.) It is 64 bit Mac. It is zipped. It isn’t in a DMG or any sort of installer. It is NOT code signed. I have been using this app to test how opening non-signed Mac Apps work. After (finally) opening the app

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
On 29/03/2021 22:11, Roger Guay via use-livecode wrote: Thanks, Alex. Unfortunately it comes up with the “No Entry” sign on this machine. Roger I'm not exactly sure what message this is, or when it happens. But this sounds like "Fortunately, ..." because I think it means you have an app

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 4:35 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > I think we're all on the same page here. > :thumbs_up -- Trevor DeVore ScreenSteps www.screensteps.com ___ use-livecode mailing list

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
On 3/29/21 1:20 PM, Craig Newman via use-livecode wrote: For about eight users in my business I distribute standalones for desktop only, both Mac and Windows versions. These are developed on a Mac. Simple to update and make, simple to give away, simple to use. That is the aspect of this

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
Trevor DeVore wrote: > We agree that LiveCode should include a sensible baseline for building > a standalone. We also agree that they shouldn't try to write solutions > for all possible ways that someone may need to distribute a > standalone. My 2 cents is that LiveCode should provide a way for

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 3:56 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > Here's the bottom of the post you were replying to: > > One suitable solution in the box is all that's needed, > with the option for folks to turn it off if they prefer >

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Thanks, Alex. Unfortunately it comes up with the “No Entry” sign on this machine. Roger > On Mar 29, 2021, at 1:36 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode > wrote: > > > On 29/03/2021 21:23, Roger Guay via use-livecode wrote: >> I have to admit I haven’t had a lot of time to experiment yet on my

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
Trevor DeVore wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:24 PM Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> Trevor DeVore wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 12:31 PM Richard Gaskin wrote: >> >> Add-ons to the product experience can be a useful temporary >> >> workaround for long-time users, but if we step back and

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
On 29/03/2021 20:54, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode wrote: On 3/29/2021 3:36 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote: there is some way to allow unsigned apps to run on all current and foreseeable versions of the desktop OSes I think your assumption that you will be able - even via some

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
On 29/03/2021 21:23, Roger Guay via use-livecode wrote: I have to admit I haven’t had a lot of time to experiment yet on my wife’s computer as I've been busy here trying to communicate my problem. Also, my wife’s computer is busy helping her work from home, not to mention, her style is to

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
I have to admit I haven’t had a lot of time to experiment yet on my wife’s computer as I've been busy here trying to communicate my problem. Also, my wife’s computer is busy helping her work from home, not to mention, her style is to have numerous windows open all the time. Drives me nuts! I

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
I’m sure you’re right about this. And, If this be the case, I would ask for the work-around approach . . . a LiveCodeLight App downloadable from RunRev (or other approved source) that runs stacks but hides or strips the IDE. Roger > On Mar 29, 2021, at 12:54 PM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
Roger, this is frustrating, isn't it !! If I were you, I'd send an email to the list saying (something along the lines of ) I want to get to the bottom of this. I'm going to host a Zoom call on my wife's Mac at where I will share my screen so you can all see what I'm doing, and I'll

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
On 3/29/2021 3:36 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote: there is some way to allow unsigned apps to run on all current and foreseeable versions of the desktop OSes I think your assumption that you will be able - even via some horribly convoluted series of steps - to run unsigned and

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Craig. You and I are very much in the same boat as far as how we use LiveCode. The problem is not constructing the standalones. LiveCode is superb in this regard. The problem is distributing Apple unapproved standalones. It seems I can no longer do that anymore as I used to. The problem is

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
On 29/03/2021 19:20, Craig Newman via use-livecode wrote: Roger. For about eight users in my business I distribute standalones for desktop only, both Mac and Windows versions. These are developed on a Mac. Simple to update and make, simple to give away, simple to use. That is the aspect of

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:24 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Trevor DeVore wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 12:31 PM Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> Add-ons to the product experience can be a useful temporary > >> workaround for long-time users, but

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
Trevor DeVore wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 12:31 PM Richard Gaskin wrote: >> Add-ons to the product experience can be a useful temporary >> workaround for long-time users, but if we step back and look >> at the gestalt of the user experience they're not a true solution. >> > > Do you think

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Craig Newman via use-livecode
Roger. For about eight users in my business I distribute standalones for desktop only, both Mac and Windows versions. These are developed on a Mac. Simple to update and make, simple to give away, simple to use. That is the aspect of this thread that I do not understand, perhaps misreading

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
matthias_livecode_150811 wrote: > Don't blame Microsoft and Apple I'm not sure anyone here is. Jumping through hoops is painful, of course, but I think the folks here recognize that having their data and devices compromised is even more painful. > And purchasing a code signing certificate

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 12:31 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Trevor DeVore wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:57 AM Richard Gaskin wrote: > > > >> TL/DR: > >> > >> We don't need a generic player. > >> > >> What we need is an updated

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread John Balgenorth via use-livecode
They will probably never take the time to be bothered with complaining by not buying from Apple or Microsoft. It would be easier for them to not buy electricity from the power companies and that won’t happen either. JB > On Mar 29, 2021, at 10:51 AM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode > wrote: > >

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
Trevor DeVore wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:57 AM Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> TL/DR: >> >> We don't need a generic player. >> >> What we need is an updated Standalone Builder, to provide >> more complete tooling and better guidance for building a >> modern standalone. > > > An easy way to

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread matthias rebbe via use-livecode
Don't blame Microsoft and Apple There is a reason why MS and Apple require such things. It is security. If there weren't any "bad" people who try to hack, hijack or infect our computers using viruses, trojan or other ways, then it wouldn't be necessary either. As a developer I am also not very

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 10:57 AM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > TL/DR: > > We don't need a generic player. > > What we need is an updated Standalone Builder, to provide more complete > tooling and better guidance for building a modern standalone. > An

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Beautifully said, Rick! Especially your point about it being a PITA. Thanks! > On Mar 29, 2021, at 9:36 AM, Rick Harrison via use-livecode > wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > Perhaps improving standalone building should be put at > the top of the priority of things to improve for LiveCode. > > I

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
On 3/29/2021 12:28 PM, Roger Guay via use-livecode wrote: In any case it is not as easy as it use to be and IMO, this door may be closing. You are 100% right. The door is closing and will eventually be closed unless enough consumers of Apple (and Windows) products complain with their buying

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Brian Milby via use-livecode
The days of distributing apps without a cost to the developer are unfortunately over (Mac/Win). If you want someone to be able to open an app on their Mac without jumping through hoops, then you need to be a paid developer and do the sign/notarize dance. LC could help automate parts of the

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
On 3/29/2021 12:36 PM, Rick Harrison via use-livecode wrote: Many LC users want to be able to create their application, and deploy it quickly to their own computers, or to give away to their family members. They are not interested in inserting Apple or other corporations into their personal

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
On 3/29/2021 12:15 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: In terms of the general thrust behind this thread - I completely agree that standalone building has become tortuous over the last few years as all platforms add more and more hoops you have to jump through. However, this is

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
Unfortunately nothing can replace the requirement for an Apple developer account on Mac, which is the reason for the request here. But I'd love to see notarization and stapling built in. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On

Re: We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
YES . . . What he said! > On Mar 29, 2021, at 8:55 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > wrote: > > TL/DR: > > We don't need a generic player. > > What we need is an updated Standalone Builder, to provide more complete > tooling and better guidance for building a modern standalone. > > >

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Hi Mark, Perhaps improving standalone building should be put at the top of the priority of things to improve for LiveCode. I think people are very frustrated that they are having great difficulties in building a standalone. A process that used to be relatively simple is now way too complex.

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Craig, I apologize for the confusion. I tended to shift focus throughout this thread. I too have, in the past, made and distributed standalones with great ease. But recently Apple and perhaps others have made it very difficult to do this as they are now requiring(?) that one be an Apple

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread John Balgenorth via use-livecode
And another good reason not to kick sand in LC’s face is they appear to be the only ones who have invested the money and time for the free community version to exist as it is today with the many features it has now. Think about if before you become so cheap & selfish that you try to destroy them.

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Mark Waddingham via use-livecode
On 2021-03-27 22:22, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: Also note: The stacks you distribute cannot violate the LC license agreement. They can't reproduce IDE features or allow users to do things that only a licensed user can do. Please don't violate the license agreement; we all want LC to

We don't need a Player (was Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones)

2021-03-29 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
TL/DR: We don't need a generic player. What we need is an updated Standalone Builder, to provide more complete tooling and better guidance for building a modern standalone. - more complete version Background -- This thread, and many

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-29 Thread Craig Newman via use-livecode
I have been following this thread with interest, and have no idea what anyone is talking about. I make and update standalones regularly on my Mac, and distribute them to many Windows and Mac desktop users in my company. All for “personal’ use. Somewhere in the middle of all this, I thought

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread John Balgenorth via use-livecode
Thanks for clarifying that for me! As far as the license stuff goes on the community version I personally think the community is allowed to supersede LiveCode if they feel like investing the time. It should not be able to be held back just to make sure all of the new features are done by the

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
John et al, To recap: My ultimate goal is to get support for RunRev to provide a LiveCodeLight download that opens stacks but hides or strips the IDE. I can’t believe this would be difficult in any way. In the meantime, I am trying to recreate the old Standalone app method (See Jacquelines’

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread John Balgenorth via use-livecode
I was thinking one of the reasons people were saying not to provide a scaled down version of the development system to do it was because they were afraid it would interfere with the license. But since you can do it according to some of you is proof you are allowed to automate the process and that

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Dev via use-livecode
If it works, the upside is that anyone can do it themselves and coach their family into doing the two step process once on the first time install. If it doesn’t work, we need to get a real developer to make a real app that jumps through Apple’s hoops. And then the developer has to keep it

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread John Balgenorth via use-livecode
I may have got lost on this subject but if his goal was to make it easy for people to open his app by doing something like using a scaled down version of the development system then this one step of doing it twice is a valid reason for using what he wanted because people do not want to be bothered

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread scott--- via use-livecode
I may have described it incorrectly. After re-testing here on OS 11.2.3 I found that it required two tries. Trying to open it the first time meets with failure. But Right clicking and choosing “Open” the second time gives a second dialog that will allow it to open. — Scott > On Mar 28,

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
James, Kelly and Brian, Thanks for sticking with me on this. Perhaps, to smooth out this process, I should look for an uncertified app to download to my own machine, instead of working off of her machine. Have you any suggestions for that? Answers to some of your question: I emailed a

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread james--- via use-livecode
Hi Roger, You wrote: > Nope! Right clicking on a standalone I?m trying to share with my wife on her > iMac w OS 11.2 results in this menu: Open Attachment - Quick Look Attachment > - Save Attachment?. - Save to Downloads Folder - Share - Copy - Speech This list of menu options looks like

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Jim Lambert via use-livecode
> Richard G. wrote: > > I raise my whiskey > to toast your whisky. Sláinte! JIm Lambert ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Dev via use-livecode
So how are you getting it on to her machine? Drag and drop across the net in your house? Email? AirDrop? Lets start from the beginning and sort this out, because I think you ought to be able to do it. Kelly > On 28 Mar, 2021, at 5:46 PM, Roger Guay via use-livecode > wrote: > > I feel bad

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
Alex Tweedly wrote: > On 27/03/2021 02:43, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: >> This makes the Community Edition a natural fit for a generic player, >> since the proliferation the license explicitly encourages would be >> very much with the grain of its goals. >> >> But then we have to ask:

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
I feel bad that you guys are sticking with me to no avail. Saving it first to Downloads or Desktop does not work. Sorry to be such a bother, Roger > On Mar 28, 2021, at 4:26 PM, Dev via use-livecode > wrote: > > Agreed. Save to the desktop and then try the right click Open command. > >

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Dev via use-livecode
Agreed. Save to the desktop and then try the right click Open command. Kelly Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 28, 2021, at 5:04 PM, Brian Milby via use-livecode > wrote: > > I think the “attachment” is part of the issue. Save to downloads first? > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 28, 2021,

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Brian Milby via use-livecode
I think the “attachment” is part of the issue. Save to downloads first? Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 28, 2021, at 6:00 PM, Roger Guay via use-livecode > wrote: > > Nope! Right clicking on a standalone I’m trying to share with my wife on her > iMac w OS 11.2 results in this menu: Open

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Nope! Right clicking on a standalone I’m trying to share with my wife on her iMac w OS 11.2 results in this menu: Open Attachment - Quick Look Attachment - Save Attachment…. - Save to Downloads Folder - Share - Copy - Speech Then, clicking on the “Open Attachment” menu item results in the same

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-28 Thread scott--- via use-livecode
Kelly is correct. While holding down the control key, click and hold (or right click) to get an additional menu allowing you to choose to open the app. — Scott > On Mar 27, 2021, at 8:33 PM, Dev via use-livecode > wrote: > > Roger > > On your wife’s machine - if you right click the app and

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Dev via use-livecode
Roger On your wife’s machine - if you right click the app and choose Open from the context menu, do you get more options about opening? If you adjust settings in the Security and Privacy System Preferences can you downgrade standards to allow a one time opening? If neither of these work, then

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Here is a report on the back door approach to opening a standalone on MAC OS 11.2: I built a stack precisely as Jacqueline specified and made a Mac standalone of it. I checked to make sure it worked on my own computer. I then sent the standalone to my wife’s computer – another Mac running the

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Thanks, Scott. I will be testing all this in the next day or so and will report. Roger > On Mar 27, 2021, at 4:56 PM, scott--- via use-livecode > wrote: > > Roger, > Yes, I believe it is on an individual app basis that occurs at the time the > app is being first opened. > — > Scott > >> On

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Thank you, Richard for these responses . . . some of which I will have to consider for a while to better understand. But I still think this idea has merit, is very easy to do and maintain and makes Livecode even more attractive to prospective customers, especially those who require easy

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
On 27/03/2021 02:43, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: This makes the Community Edition a natural fit for a generic player, since the proliferation the license explicitly encourages would be very much with the grain of its goals. But then we have to ask: how many of those who might

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread scott--- via use-livecode
Roger, Yes, I believe it is on an individual app basis that occurs at the time the app is being first opened. — Scott > On Mar 27, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Roger Guay via use-livecode > wrote: > > Jacque, > > You always come thru with such great clarity and thoroughness. I remember > going thru

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Jacque, You always come thru with such great clarity and thoroughness. I remember going thru this process a few years ago, but I thought this back door approach was closed by Apple within the last couple of OS releases. Indeed, looking at my Security tab of System Preferences in OS 11.2, I do

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
Roger Guay wrote: In the good ol days, I could build a standalone for the Mac, Windows and Linux and distribute it willy-nilly. On desktop you still can, sort of, if you don't mind instructing your users how to get around the security blocks that both Windows and Mac OS have adopted. If your

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
On 27/03/2021 18:29, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: My response to Alex was apparently too long to be read, but I touched on this in third block, re "security", re implications for a player as well: http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2021-March/263948.html Not at all "too

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Richmond via use-livecode
I despair . . . how could one lower oneself to two fingers of 'whiskey'? Just now I am enjoying a glass of whisky (without the offending 'e'). Richmond. On 27.03.21 20:29, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: Roger Guay wrote: On Mar 26, 2021, at 5:35 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: What are

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
Roger Guay wrote: > On Mar 26, 2021, at 5:35 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> What are you looking for? When were these "good ol days" >> in which one could run stack files without an engine, and >> how did that work? > > In the good ol days, I could build a standalone for the Mac, > Windows and

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
A couple of things. The developer is not even required to build a standalone, and presumably it would be easier to strip out or hide the IDE of LiveCodeLight. Otherwise, either way is good. Roger > On Mar 27, 2021, at 10:36 AM, Richmond via use-livecode > wrote: > > Maybe I'm missing

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Richmond via use-livecode
Maybe I'm missing something, but what would be the advantage of using stack runner over a standalone? Richmond. On 27.03.21 19:27, Roger Guay via use-livecode wrote: Could be, but that requires you to be an Apple Developer. Too much hassle! A LiveCodeLight from RunRev that runs stacks

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Could be, but that requires you to be an Apple Developer. Too much hassle! A LiveCodeLight from RunRev that runs stacks without the IDE would be easier. Roger > On Mar 27, 2021, at 10:18 AM, ELS Prothero via use-livecode > wrote: > > I thought that if you set up beta testers, with the id of

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
A few days ago, a very impressive post came in here from a researcher at an accelerator lab somewhere. I’ve lost the post and may have some details wrong. As I recall he was very complimentary of LiveCode as a tool for his work but was lamenting that he could no longer easily share his work

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread ELS Prothero via use-livecode
I thought that if you set up beta testers, with the id of the device an app would be run on, others could run your app as a beta tester. But, perhaps,you need an apple license to do even that? Bill William Prothero https://earthlearningsolutions.org > On Mar 26, 2021, at 10:10 PM, David

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Robert J. Earp via use-livecode
: Roger Guay mailto:i...@mac.com>> > To: How to use LiveCode <mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>> > Subject: Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones > Message-ID: <mailto:f25e115d-3799-47e3-ae4e-0ba0aad13...@mac.com>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
This conversation has given me some focus and clarification of the basic idea. Here is what I would love to see: A LiveCodeLight downloadable from the mother ship. LiveCodeLight would be a stripped down version of the community edition that would not open the IDE, but would open and run stacks.

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
You could do that on Android because Android allows private distribution. The stacks would have to be downloaded from the internet though. For iOS, no way. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On March 26, 2021 8:34:20 PM Alex

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-27 Thread J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
I don't think what you want is possible unless your target users are on very old operating systems. On Mac OS at least, every standalone now has to be notarized . You could build a standalone that launches other standalones, but each of those would also have to be notarized or the Mac won't

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-26 Thread David Squance via use-livecode
Thanks for the confirmation. Dave > On Mar 26, 2021, at 10:05 PM, Roger Guay via use-livecode > wrote: > > You’re right, David. I was specifically addressing standalones for Mac, > Windows and Linux. They are easily created without licenses etc. for use on > your own computer, but cannot be

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-26 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
You’re right, David. I was specifically addressing standalones for Mac, Windows and Linux. They are easily created without licenses etc. for use on your own computer, but cannot be distributed w/o licenses etc Roger > On Mar 26, 2021, at 9:39 PM, David Squance via use-livecode > wrote: > >

Re: New(?) Idea for Standalones

2021-03-26 Thread Roger Guay via use-livecode
Yes, that’s probably the best answer so far. I just think it’s a little bit harder to convince someone to download Livecode community than to pick up a cute little app from the app store specifically designed to run standalones. Just a stupid idea I guess. Roger > On Mar 26, 2021, at 9:28

  1   2   >