LCS widgets?

[mwieder]

Rather than hunting around or reinventing the wheel, expect support for popular APIs including Stripe, Paypal, Sign On, Google Sheets and many more out of the box.

from https://livecode.com/progress-update-on ... invention/

[richmond62]

One interesting Q that could be asked is whether this new type of widget, having been made in LC 9.6.8 could then be ported for use in earlier (I.e. open source) versions of LiveCode.

As LCB widgets authored in commercial versions of LiveCode contain script that blocks their use in free versions.

[SparkOut]

Rather than hunting around or reinventing the wheel, expect support for popular APIs including Stripe, Paypal, Sign On, Google Sheets and many more out of the box.

from https://livecode.com/progress-update-on ... invention/

I do believe this is conflating the idea of "FFI" with "API" a bit, Kevin's report on the Year of Reinvention covers several areas.
I suspect these widgets to perform like libraries, such as already packaged for Oauth2, which interact with published web APIs. I suspect this does not extend to the low level operating system calls which might currently be accessed through LCS.
That's not to say I'm disappointed. The progress is first class, and I'm very excited to see news of these developments. I just think that essentially converting LCB to LCS is a dream too far. I'd give credit to the team in achieving everything they set out, but not expect them to make lollipops grow on trees.

[FourthWorld]

One interesting Q that could be asked is whether this new type of widget, having been made in LC 9.6.8 could then be ported for use in earlier (I.e. open source) versions of LiveCode.

Nothing LiveCode Ltd has released since they dropped the open source edition has been license-compatible with GPL. I don't expect that to change.

[richmond62]

I don't expect that to change.

I have learnt one or two things in my 60 years:

1. There is never any harm in asking: the worst thing they can say is 'No.'

2. Sometime the answer provides more information than is expected by the person
who asks the question.

3. Sometimes the answer to a question actually sidesteps answering the question.

The question contained this:

is whether this new type of widget, having been made in LC 9.6.8 could
then be ported for use in earlier (I.e. open source) versions of LiveCode.

The answer did NOT constitute a 'No', what it did constitute was something re licence compatibility.

Now, were I to author some software using a commercial variant of LiveCode,
am I not permitted to release that software I have authored as freeware?

[mwieder]

I do believe this is conflating the idea of "FFI" with "API" a bit,.

I do think it just means that some REST APIs are going to be wrapped for easy digestion.
FFI access is still going to need LCB. Although note that the older external interface is also sill supported if you need to go that route.

[bn]

One interesting Q that could be asked is whether this new type of widget, having been made in LC 9.6.8 could then be ported for use in earlier (I.e. open source) versions of LiveCode.

I think it will be impossible because it was mentioned that LC had to tweak the engine to make LCS-widgets run.

Kind regards
Bernd

[richmond62]

Thanks Bernd.

Now that was a helpful answer.

[FourthWorld]

I don't expect that to change.

The question contained this:

is whether this new type of widget, having been made in LC 9.6.8 could
then be ported for use in earlier (I.e. open source) versions of LiveCode.

The answer did NOT constitute a 'No', what it did constitute was something re licence compatibility.

When you get an answer from anyone, that answer will reflect that person's best judgment. In my office I don't mix software with incompatible license types.

The GPL is clear, LC Ltd's intentions are clear. Neither will physically prevent you from ignoring either. But as Bernd reminded, features dependent on a new engine will require that new engine. It's always been that way, with all software.

Now, were I to author some software using a commercial variant of LiveCode,
am I not permitted to release that software I have authored as freeware?

Neither the GPL that LC once distributed a version under nor their current proprietary EULA express any opinion on pricing developers may choose for the software they create.

The "free" in "Free and Open Source Software" refers to libre, not gratis.

[richmond62]

I wouldn't squabble with any of that at all.

The only thing I do wonder about is whether one is allowed to develop
(let's say a LiveCode standalone) from a commercially licensed version
of LiveCode and give it away . . .

(and that, FourthWorld, you have clarified insofar as you have stated that
anyone developing anything with LiveCode can choose what [or nothing] to charge for it)

. . . the follow on from that is whether:

1. One could author a LCS widget with the latest licensed version of LiveCode

(the user having, quite obviously, paid for a licence)

and release that "into the wild" as, both free, and in
such a way that users of earlier, Open Source versions of LiveCode could use it.

[FourthWorld]

...and release that "into the wild" as, both free, and in
such a way that users of earlier, Open Source versions of LiveCode could use it.

There are permissive licenses like MIT which are compatible with both GPL and most proprietary license terms.

But anyone without a proprietary engine to run it would be able to enjoy reading the code but not executing it.

[richmond62]

You need to keep up with the news.

Oddly enough, I'd love to, BUT there are one or two things that get in the way:

1. I teach from 10.30 am to 7 pm 4 days a week in my EFL school (English as a Fudged Language [ well, that's what I call it]).

2. Baking bread, digging the garden, and all the crap that makes up 50% of looking after a house in the mountains.

3. Living a bit: the odd bit of time with my wife, reading books, listening to non-moronic music . . .

4. Developing programs for the school that are, from a programming point of view, incredibly, depressingly
simple, but from the point of content and presentation as innovative and interesting as I can manage.

5. Keeping my Devawriter Pro software program rolling forwards (in 5th SDLC at the point of writing, about 12 years old so far).

6. Working on a software programs for full implementation of Glagolitic and Staro-Slaviyanska Ezik.

7. Worrying about my 92 year old Mum in England . . .

8. Worrying about my (rented) property in Scotland . . .

The thing I find most difficult to understand is that I find it extremely difficult to believe that most contributors to
these forums have any less "full" lives than I do . . .

[dunbarx]

The trick is to cultivate a respite from either your job or your family.

I do both.

Craig

[richmond62]

The trick is to cultivate a respite from either your job or your family.

That generally happens between 1 and 5 am when I am fast asleep.