Re: Saving script-only stacks

[Monte Goulding]

Thanks

> On 13 Sep 2016, at 7:40 AM, J. Landman Gay  wrote:
> 
> On 9/12/16 4:17 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>> Everything needs a report so it can be tracked for testing.
> 
> http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=18375
> 
> -- 
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
> HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Saving script-only stacks

[J. Landman Gay]

On 9/12/16 4:17 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:

Everything needs a report so it can be tracked for testing.


http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=18375

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Saving script-only stacks

[Monte Goulding]

Everything needs a report so it can be tracked for testing.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 13 Sep 2016, at 7:07 AM, J. Landman Gay  wrote:
> 
> I didn't open a report, I thought the behavior was either intentional or 
> unavoidable. If you're submitting a fix anyway, probably no need for a 
> report, right?


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Saving script-only stacks

[J. Landman Gay]

On 9/12/16 3:43 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:


I was pretty certain we had identified and sorted that out but I can
see we haven’t. Have you opened a report? It’s a fairly easy fix
which I’ll submit today for 8.1.1 RC 1.


I didn't open a report, I thought the behavior was either intentional or 
unavoidable. If you're submitting a fix anyway, probably no need for a 
report, right?


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Saving script-only stacks

[Monte Goulding]

> On 13 Sep 2016, at 6:29 AM, J. Landman Gay  wrote:
> 
>> Actually this should be resolved in RC 2. I presume you are still seeing it 
>> there?
> 
> Yup.

Sorry Jacque

I was pretty certain we had identified and sorted that out but I can see we 
haven’t. Have you opened a report? It’s a fairly easy fix which I’ll submit 
today for 8.1.1 RC 1.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Saving script-only stacks

[J. Landman Gay]

On 9/12/16 3:20 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:

Actually this should be resolved in RC 2. I presume you are still seeing it 
there?


Yup.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Saving script-only stacks

[Monte Goulding]

Actually this should be resolved in RC 2. I presume you are still seeing it 
there?

Sent from my iPhone

> On 13 Sep 2016, at 6:01 AM, J. Landman Gay  wrote:
> 
> Or I could just live with it.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Saving script-only stacks

[J. Landman Gay]

I'm undecided about how to classify this behavior. I have LC prefs set 
to always save stacks in their original stackfile format. That mostly 
works transparently except in the case of script-only stacks.


LC stores the original stackfile version as a custom property in the 
stack, and since script-only stacks don't have properties, every time I 
try to save one I get the warning dialog about how the minimum required 
version is LC 7.0, and do I really want to save it as LC 2.4. I assume 
since there's no property at all, the dialog is defaulting to the oldest 
version in its list.


It isn't a huge deal, but it does require me to click the "7.0" button 
on every save, which happens often. Should LC just assume that 
script-only stacks are always to be saved in 7.0 format?


What about adding the version to the "script" declaration at the top?

Or I could just live with it.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode