30 replies to this topic

[Brito]

Hello!

Boot Land is refreshing the downloads section that wasn't updated since 2007.

This occurs after this discussion: http://www.boot-land...showtopic=10694

Where some of the older scripts are obviously causing confusion to users. We are simplifying the process and keeping the downloads inside the forums.

The good part is that this will allow developers to update topics made by other users years ago if necessary.

This is also a good opportunity to expand the downloads sections to become a bit more useful than before when it was dedicated in majority to winbuilder app scripts.

Everyone is welcome to submit downloads of apps or files that they consider interesting to share, just be sure that it's legal so that we don't get into troubles with the police.

Thank you for reading and hope you keep having a good time around our community!

[Galapo]

Hi Nuno,

Is it just me, or is the new downloads section very cluttered?


I'm glad I'm not trying to find something there because it just seems very unorganised and stuff everywhere.

In comparison, the old download section was quite orderly and organised:




Maybe it's possible to resurrect the old download page?

Regards,
Galapo.

[paraglider]

Still cannot see any reference to where you download winbuilder itself.

[Brito]

Maybe it's possible to resurrect the old download page?

No, sorry but it wasn't used by developers anymore and the outdated scripts were causing troubles.

In comparison, the old download section was quite orderly and organised:

Perhaps I can create subforums for app scripts but then we would require volunteers to move app scripts inside each categorized folder.

I'm glad I'm not trying to find something there because it just seems very unorganised and stuff everywhere.

So, things will remain unorganized until someone with free time to organize them steps forward. If these details bother you, I'd seriously appreciate your help to keep it organized for the rest of us folks find quickly what is needed.

Still cannot see any reference to where you download winbuilder itself.

I'll probably add a reference on the read me or even a pinned topic at downloads to mention this.

What do you think?

[MedEvil]

I personly liked the first download center the best, if anyone cares.

The reason the download section is not really used is, that Boot-Land changed.
Back in the day, all scripts outside Default project were distributed over the download center.

With the coming of multiple project servers and own subdomains this changed.
People who maintain one of the above usually release their scripts there and not in the download section.
So the download section is mostly for hit and run developers.

[Brito]

I personly liked the first download center the best, if anyone cares.

Yes, I also liked it better.

But it was difficult to manage and modify as we see for the case of the old VistaPE scripts.

This way we can also expand it to other things non-app script related and keep people on the forum updated on what is added.

[MedEvil]

No Nuno, i really meant the first, not the previous.

[Brito]

No Nuno, i really meant the first, not the previous.

Sorry, it's still early around here and my brain hasn't finished rebooting.

Would you mind explaining a bit better what you mean?

[MedEvil]

We're at the moment at the 3rd incarnation of the download center / section, not the second.
The one you linked to was the second.
The first can only be accessed by a special handshake, if it still exists.

[Galapo]

I agree with MedEvil: the slowdown in use of the downloads section has more in the way projects are developed and maintained these days.

If these details bother you, I'd seriously appreciate your help to keep it organized for the rest of us folks find quickly what is needed.

Well, this requires time. And project maintainers don't have time for this because they're constantly having to monitor scripts in their project for incompatibilites with WB and consequently updating scripts. Since Lancelot's and mine appeal to actually adhere to the agreement which was reached regarding script syntax was rejected by WB development, then basic script syntax is still in a state of flux and uncertainty (as has been the case for the last two years!) so the monitoring of scripts still needs to continue. I really wish we were beyond this stage by now so time can be devoted to other things, but it seems there's little hope for this still. As such, you'll need to get help from those not tied up with WB projects.

Regards,
Galapo.

[Lancelot]

maybe someone remember,

I started to gather scripts around to a single wb server and was planing more adjustments to suit more build environments (pe1/pe2/pe3)

Goal was finding scripts and relevant topics easier, and even downloading easier by using power of index.html generation. (+wb dl mechanism)

For a start, I wrote author names, I put weblinks to point either topics where they are found from and for the ones that does not have topics I put link to apps section, renamed some scripts that have double triple names referring author names and put only scripts that I personally tested.

Still there is work to be done (environment checks and a set of idea in mind ....) but currently I need to recheck all again to be sure IF they are still working or not !!! and I do not have time for that (Galapo already wrote reasons)


It is only spending some time to organise scripts and honestly it is fun for me, I like ogranizing things . But currently it is only wasting time since it will result only with making scripts work temporarly. We have a new storm coming declared post 29 here and magnitude of this storm is currently unknown as seen post 34 here .

If anyone volunteers for organising script, I wish my best log to him/her.

[Galapo]

We have a new storm coming declared post 39 here and magnitude of this storm is currently unknown as seen post 34 here .

Yep, and pretty much predicted by my appropriately named topic "WB scripting unpredictability": http://www.boot-land...showtopic=10665.

It was stated at that topic that my topic could have been better named "WB scripting inconsistency", but now we have Peter's own words on the matter:

That is 100% correct.
Quotes currently give the possibility to "hide" problematic syntax. And I do NOT agree to that.

Next alpha of WB, where I'm currently working on, will have a 100% STRICT syntax. The new features are working with this "STRICT" syntax only.

If you want to use the "Old" syntax, in the script, under [Main] you can delare "Strict=Weak". Then it will use the current weak syntax rules, but none of the new features is available.

In other words, foundational WB scripting syntax is still in a state of unpredicatable flux as Peter implements his no-quote regime. There is said to be a so-called old/weak syntax and a new (strong?) syntax where quotes are, I guess, not tolerated. This is after at least two years where these things have been discussed repeatedly and the desire from those outside WB development is for a more user-friendly approach to script syntax. However, instead WB development insists on implementing an approach to script syntax which is not user-friendly and approaches the absurd with the need for escapes of escapes (##$c) and escapes of escapes of escapes (###$c). Now there seems to be even some threats of stiff-arm tactics where "new features" won't be available to .script developers who prefer the more user-friendly approach to script syntax which utilises quotes and consequently avoids the endless need for escapes of escapes etc. An agreement had been reached with WB development over the issue of script syntax where the use of quotes was going to be reintroduced to solve these issues, but there seems to have been a backdown on the promise given, so we're back to a state of unpredictability waiting to see what the no-quote regime will bring in its train.

Regards,
Galapo.

[Brito]

You guys really feel strong about publicizing your "incoherent" topic over and over again.

For that purpose you already have the "Galapo & Lancelot Questions & Answers" topic where you express your thoughts freely without disrupting the topic that is currently being dealt with side-track discussions.

I'm not asking for restructuring or reuploading anything. It's just moving app scripts that are already placed on the app scripts onto categories.

Let's focus.

[Galapo]

You guys really feel strong about publicizing your "incoherent" topic over and over again.

Yep. Because for the last two years we've kept LiveXP constantly updated and supporting the latest WB version (apart from the 078-series where bugs in WB prevented us from doing so). And still after these two years there is still no settled script syntax. We had an agreement with WB development with regards to this, but that's been rejected. So now we're left really in the same position after two years with regards to syntax: unpredictability at the moment. Peter seems bent on implementing his no-quotes regime, even though this breaks his agreement and even though this means yet another round of updating scripts to support a new WB version. Now I can see why others like yourself might not be worked up about this -- but that's because other projects have not been keeping as up-to-date as LiveXP has and as for yourself you haven't been maintaining a project. It's just that we've devoted so much time into this and we're still in the same position. LiveXP has been quite the testing grounds for WB, but now we're just getting kicked in the guts and not being heard. Peter knows what's going on, but then he's the one who wants to steamroll everyone into writing scripts without quotes. Truly, he seems to get some satisfaction out of writing his ###$c escapes etc., but for the rest of us we want some sense restored to WB script syntax (well, I guess I speak for Lancelot and myself). That's what this boxing round is over and if Peter gets his way with not keeping his promise then WB script syntax unintelligibility will unfortunately continue. If that's what you want, fine, continue writing your escapes of escapes of escapes (###$c etc.). But if you don't relish in this, then please step in and reign Peter in from his vendetta against quotes. We really want some reasonableness to WB scripting restored.

Thanks,
Galapo.

[Brito]

We really want some reasonableness to WB scripting restored.

Then please do so in the appropriate topics.

I appreciate your effort but I cannot discuss it further here on this topic as it would become off topic. Also, please consider clicking "enter" a few times after writing a 4~5 lines so that the text doesn't become one big block of letters that becomes so hard to read and follow.

Our goal for this topic is introducing the downloads section and possible improvements.

Really hope you can solve all your worries about wb soon enough but going off topic does not help.

Also hope you can understand that we need to focus on this specific matter right now, thank you.

[Galapo]

Then please do so in the appropriate topics.

Well, easy for you to say. We've been down this road before. There was an agreement reached, but it has now been rejected by WB development. I've raised this in my own topic, but you keep talking about a test project. I did so with posts you've now moved to another topic, but you post about app scripts etc. Jaclaz has complained about these things time and time again. Still nothing changes. Even after two years we're still in the same boat. What a waste of time in my books! You're fortunate you haven't been in the same boat we have, trying to keep a project maintained. It's all completely disheartening.

I think I'm done beating this dead horse.

Regards,
Galapo.

[Lancelot]

Hi Nuno,

My comment on this topic is about new download section, that is all. But you do not seem get the direct connection between unpredictable wb syntax rules and new download section ! which I tried to explain in my previous post. (please check)

What is new download section is for ? --> As far as I understand, It is to organise scripts for new comers (and all) so they can find what they are looking for easly. As a result you expect updated scripts (working today scripts) have topics there.

Ideally Fine and I would like to take part because i love these stuff, but currently it is impossible because we can not predict script syntax hence we can not say new scripts that exists in this new section today will work tomorrow.

Proof: According to post 29 , neither scripts of new section if added today, nor scripts of old section and scripts all around web on personal websites have a less chance to work tomorrow.

It is a proof of how decisions made so quickly without thinking the other scripts around.

For organisation (either with new download sections, new website etc.), I advice you not to worry. It can be organised the day winbuilder have good & predictable syntax.
Remember pebuilder plugin pages that serves to organise plugins. They are there because nobody need to update scripts all the time.

We have a powerfull builder,
We have enhancing capi,
We have good organisation capi syntaxes to distinguish pe building environment,
We have team working members,
We have advanced members that makes wonderfull app scripts,

What we do not have is we do not know if these scripts work or not !!! It is unpredictable, hence organising today becomes meaningless.


For me no problem at all. I learned most of script writing (script syntax + workaround making) so If a script in my archive do not work I can make it work.

But making a general organisation of scripts for all ! , come onnn.

I wish you put more power to script syntax rules than these stuff.
The day people can write scripts easly with not everyday changing rules, it will take quite short time to organise things.
Hence wb projects will dramatically increase in number with its popularity on net .

It is sad to see things can not be going to this direction.

[Brito]

What we do not have is we do not know if these scripts work or not

That's the reason why I am not a perfectionist.

Instead of hoping that everything works together one day nice and perfectly, it is better to actually focus on small steps into improving the current work conditions. You and Galapo are very adverse to changes even thought the syntax that you complain today is actually the result of your requests.

What we are doing here is to take out the dust from downloads section and make it useful again. Please don't turn this into another drama topic of imaginary agreements and unrelated issues.

It can be organised the day winbuilder have good & predictable syntax.

This is an off topic remark because the syntax of app scripts does not depend on winbuilder.exe

You can pick on app scripts made on 2007 and work with them today. If they don't work it's also irrelevant to the discussion here. What is needed right now is to categorize them.

[Lancelot]

You and Galapo are very adverse to changes even thought the syntax that you complain today is actually the result of your requests.

NO it is not. What we do actually do is chasing psc's undeclared (or silently) changes.

Even 250 post long topic only have 4-5 significant results. Except 2 of them (which are new syntaxes) rest (which are accepted by psc at that time) not written as syntax rule anywhere.

Rest of these are to have "STRICK RULES" so we would know what will or will not work in future. They are "SILENTLY" not written after development ends. As a result nobody still DO NOT know what will happen hence this is valid for apps scripts.

What we are doing here is to take out the dust from downloads section and make it useful again. Please don't turn this into another drama topic of imaginary agreements and unrelated issues.

Thanks already answering with soap opera style.

This is an off topic remark because the syntax of app scripts does not depend on winbuilder.exe

This is wrong too. App scripts (except very simple ones) contains reg_write entries some depends on wb script macros where still we do NOT know what will work or not.


What we ask for is having READABLE (easy) and STRICK RULES.

What we get is IGNORANCE and Soap opera style replies.

As#$sI#$swrote#$sbefore#$c#$sI#$swish#$smy#$sbest#$sluck.

[Wonko the Sane]

What is needed right now is to categorize them.

Which should be rephrased as:

What I think is needed right now is to categorize them.

Everyone has his own set of priorities, yours appear to be aimed toward "evolution" (or "convolution") mine tend to be about pragamtically having something working.

In other words, I would like to help, but I would also like that the categorized items are actually working, as categorizing items that do not work, or work only if modified it is of no use to new members.

I mean which is the practical difference between "NOT finding a NOT working something" and "finding it, and then find it doesn't work"?



Wonko

P.S.: To easen peter reading, here is the contents of my post in plain winbuilderish:
In#$sother#$swords#$c#$sI#$swould#$slike#$sto#$shelp#$c#$sbut#$sI#$swould#$salso#$slike#$sthat#$sthe#$scategorized#$sitems#$sare#$sactually#$sworking#$c#$sas#$scategorizing#$sitems#$sthat#$sdo#$snot#$swork#$c#$sor#$swork#$sonly#$sif#$smodified#$sit#$sis#$sof#$sno#$suse#$sto#$snew#$smembers.

I#$smean#$swhich#$sis#$sthe#$spractical#$sdifference#$sbetween#$s#$qNOT#$sfinding#$sa#$sNOT#$sworking#$ssomething#$q#$sand#$s#$qfinding#$sit#$c#$sand#$sthen#$sfind#$sit#$sdoesn't#$swork#$q?

[Brito]

What we get is IGNORANCE and Soap opera style replies.

This happens because when you have an hammer in you hand, you'll see every problem like a nail.

Please understand that no part of your previous reply is related to the downloads section, that we are discussing here.

This is why I ask you to focus on what is currently being discussed instead of trying to divert the discussion to whatever is troubling your soul which should be discussed here:
http://www.boot-land...showtopic=10702

Because the above link was explicitly created for for you and Galapo to express you feelings and you already repeated the same arguments several times before in other non-related topics, let's stop cluttering this discussion and get back on track, shall we?

Thank you.

[Lancelot]

This happens because when you have an hammer in you hand, you'll see every problem like a nail.

WRONG

get back on track, shall we?

That is what we are looking for, a good track to follow

Please understand that no part of your previous reply is related to the downloads section, that we are discussing here.

Since my previous replies do not show you the relation (which should but you ignore them !!! and why !!!), here is repeating jaclaz's words which is exactly what I wrote (but with better english)

In other words, I would like to help, but I would also like that the categorized items are actually working, as categorizing items that do not work, or work only if modified it is of no use to new members.

I mean which is the practical difference between "NOT finding a NOT working something" and "finding it, and then find it doesn't work"?

[john3voltas]

I thought I'd come down to the forum to ask a question about latest WB and I find this huge discussion about what WB could and should be.
Guys, I'm all for it but it seems that hasn't got much to do with this topic.
Maybe this topic doesn't make sense but it was open for a purpose and some of us are using it for a different purpose.
We could open a new topic and start a really nice and healthy discussion about WB, it's syntax, etc.
Oh, and maybe we could do it in a low profile and civilized manner, since you're all working on the same team .
Come on, you guys as long timers should set the standards.

[Lancelot]

I thought I'd come down to the forum to ask a question about latest WB

check here
http://www.boot-land...hp?showforum=96
ask here
http://www.boot-land...hp?showforum=33

and I find this huge discussion about what WB could and should be.

Guys, I'm all for it but it seems that hasn't got much to do with this topic.

nope you get it wrong, here we are trying to show Nuno categorizing apps scripts is meaningless when we do not have wb easy to use strick syntax rules to follow. Just read my previous post.

Sadly Nuno do not reply to these concerns causing a soap opera long topic !.

Well it is hard to cut strickly the difference between categorizing scripts and wb not trustable syntax that makes scripts unusable for new comers. (which this topic created for that reason !!!!)

Come on, you guys as long timers should set the standards.

I wish we could.

At least for me, I want to have easy to use strick wb syntax rules so I can start categorizing apps scripts. I hope you understand the relation.

[john3voltas]

@Lancelot,

I'm quite sure that Nuno will be willing to talk about it somewhere else.
I know we Portuguese are a bit stubborn but I think we can admit being wrong when there are hard evidence of such.
But please, don't take this discussion to another level.
For instance, Galapo says "he thinks he's done beating this dead horse".
I'm quite sure WB is not a dead horse otherwise it wouldn't create me a boot disk every month.
Maybe it has a lot of stuff to be discussed, but it sure is not a dead tool.
Could you guys settle things straight, without quitting?
I mean, without devs of script keepers, there is no WB.
Just a thought.
Cheers