105 replies to this topic

[Galapo]

BTW: You should check ALL the LiveXP app scripts. There is at least one script having your very important magic code, but w/o having defined ScrollBox_RunFromWhere in the Interface

Hi Peter,

I assume you mean HivesFactory. Yes, we're aware of it, but it works fine with 077rc2 and 080, the versions supported by LiveXP. Latest HivesFactory on nativeEx server contains other bugs, so we're not willing to update the script.

Some people name this way of posting as "not very fair"
If there is something more, please tell us detailled:

• The several items with
  
• Giving the current code which is not running any more
• How many month (sorry, minutes) are necessary to adapt
• Why this item will NOT work with previous WB versions after adapting

Peter

Peter, there's little point in going further. Truly, I've given up totally on winbuilder.exe development. You even seem to be deliberately introducing syntax changes to sabotage projects. For example, the following code does not work with what was your latest RC that has now been taken down from your server:

[Process]

If,Not,A,Equal,Rundefault,Run,%Scriptfile%,blaaa

 

[blaaa]

message,got here,information

That looks like sabotage.

But the ultimate reason for no longer following winbuilder.exe updates is for the simple reason that I've repeated again and again: fundamental syntax of the winbuilder engine is repeatedly altered, script developers not being included in the decision making regarding this, and not being given adequate reasons for why the changes where necessary in the first place.

Regards,
Galapo.

[Galapo]

30 LiveXP scripts contain this code

Hi Peter,

Maybe you forget the 'complete' scripts. The total to change in in reality 102 scripts, not 30 as you suggest.

Note #1: Note all scripts have the same line:

ScrollBox_RunFromWhere="Run from RAM",1,4,143,6,140,21,"Run default","Run from RAM","Run from CD"

Manual adjustments of scripts is needed. Of course, this is exceedingly frustrating when the altered syntax doesn't have to be changed and adequate reasons for the change is not provided.

Note #2: I see you didn't respond to the other important issue:

As another example, positioning of file/dir boxes on script interfaces is now different, so further scripts require updating.

This just results in more fixes added to those already mentioned above.

I for one have lost the fun of this senseless updating to support a new WB version. Maybe there's fun for you. We have no intention of following the WB update train. We're not holding back your development, feel free to publish new winbuilder.exes as you wish.

Regards,
Galapo.

[Galapo]

Hi Peter,

One last post to hopefully get you to see the picture from project developers and script developers point of view.

In case you'd forgotten, let me just point out to that the example we've been discussing

[Interface]

ScrollBox_RunFromWhere="Run from RAM",1,4,143,6,140,21,"Run default","Run from RAM","Run from CD"



[process]

StrFormat,REPLACE,%ScrollBox_RunFromWhere%," ","",%runfrom%

If,Not,%runfrom%,Equal,Rundefault,%runfrom%,True

is an instance where at the release of 080 you'd changed this syntax so this was no longer possible (without providing reasons) but after much urging you reverted so as to support it again.

Now with 081 it is again no longer possible, which again just proves the point: fundamental syntax of the winbuilder engine is repeatedly altered, script developers not being included in the decision making regarding this, and not being given adequate reasons for why the changes where necessary in the first place. No one was consulted about this, you just made the change. The impact is significant as many scripts have to be updated and we loose an important function. Further, and more crucially, there is no backward compatibility. And that's the point: backwards compatibility is not supported, which necessitates script updates just to support the new WB version. And then with the next version, what will you then change on a whim requiring other updates to support.

Maybe you have time for all this, but I think it's about time WB became a bit more backwards compatible. Because the fact of the matter is that at every WB release over the last three years or so scripts have had to be updated because WB only accepts a changed syntax.

Regards,
Galapo.

[Lancelot]

btw, lets count the significant progress on exbuilder81x:
1-speed increase compared to 080, reported by Lancelot and Galapo numerous times along with some others rarely.
At last this topic here resulted with admitance of lies with exbuilder81x, just read whole topic to see how psc and Nuno defend slow wb080 saying it is fast .
(god bless we do not depend on 080 from past experience, I know other projects already saved themselves too)
2-above syntax failure Galapo wrote which is only one of thing that proves sabotage
3-above infamous interface failure Galapo wrote (ps: I remember that was written somewhere as an order of dictator)
(Galapo, you are currently the greatest supporter of exbuilder by providing a number of bug info more than anyone else )

lets count sabotages on exbuilder81x:
well looooooong list, no thanks, it is very out of subject, If you are curious,
read documented history notes ,
test & catch undocumented features,
some of which are only the seeds of future incompatibilities.
Sabotager knows what he does, no need to tell him what he does
, for others: let progress (<-- sarcasm) go (ask Nuno), I will more prefer watch and smile than answering lieing topics campaigns.

I for one have lost the fun of this senseless updating to support a new WB version. Maybe there's fun for you. We have no intention of following the WB update train. We're not holding back your development, feel free to publish new winbuilder.exes as you wish.

also reminding post 2 of current topic for the ones who have not read.

Shortly:
STOP LIES, LiveXP and its developers NEVER take a part in any winbuilder release decision.

If you want to release a new version officially, ASK Nuno.

Or better, why asking anyone, put your website saying it is new release. Even with another new name, winbuilderex.exe or exbuilder.exe or nativeexbuilder or... . I personally do not care and have no will to reply your posts unless any lie or postgames releated LiveXP or me. (which clearly written mannnnnny times before)

[Brito]

Well. Smiley is right.

I can only see damage to our community from this constant bickering back and forth between the magic trio of PSC, Galapo and Lancelot.

Personally, at this point I couldn't care less about winbuilder syntax changes, speed or even the release of new binaries in the nearby future.

What I do care about is the community that we built with fun and honor over the years that you now seem to completely ignore just to get a sense of winning over each other.


This magic trio is constantly breaking the forum rule #7 and if you prefer to rave on, then do it over personal email as this was your first official warning and I'm sure that nobody else including yourselves see anything of productive about this discussion.

The next post that either myself or other members see around the forum as another way of cleaning up your dirty laundry against each other, then I will ensure that your accounts are refrained from participating in the forum for a week so that you guys can meditate about the value of your participation around here.

There are faults and there are defects that need to be addressed on both parts, now get a grip on what you are doing and respect our community as we have no interest in continuing to see more posts of this kind.

It would pain me to apply sanctions on members that always deserved my personal respect but you leave me with no other option, my sincere apologies.

This thread is now closed.

[amalux]

Just did a basic test: Official_Complete with wb077rc2 vs. same with 081x

wb077rc2 --> No errors and usable ISO.

x081x --> 46 Errors and NO ISO

On the upside, having no ISO to build or qemu to load up did save some time on the build



--
...and yes, smiley, you are right; the fact that Nuno has sided with and defended his xb developer's childish, self-righteous, self promoting behavior throughout this exchange is inexcusable and shameful (though he'll never see it) and as you can now see, when losing a debate, that debate gets shutdown

How sad that this once great forum has been brought to this level by two ego centric, foolish men (Nuno and PSC) bent on promoting their own agenda at any cost. Oh but we'll have 'peace' once again, when the most talented, hard working and gifted members of your team keep telling you something is wrong with the way you're doing business, threaten to fire 'em!

IMO Peter hasn't liked LiveXP for a long time now because it makes his own nativeEx look small and insignificant by comparison; this is silly because it forms the core and basis for all LiveXP development but I guess this wasn't good enough for him and now, through sabotage and deceit, with Nuno's misguided support, nativeEx will now be #1!! as he always thought it should be. Maybe we didn't give Peter enough credit along the way, he really is a brilliant project developer; when other projects threaten your standing, destroy them