TS Net for Indy vs Business

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

TS Net for Indy vs Business

Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami
We need some help.

We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external

but

functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail without the business license.

What we need is

Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.

and we have a stack with sample code
   one card script with all functions that work in Indy
   one card script with all functions that work in Business only


Svasti Astu, Be Well
Brahmanathaswami
www.himalayanacademy.com

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Skip Kimpel
What features are you getting "unlicensed" for?

SKIP

> On Dec 26, 2016, at 9:03 PM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> We need some help.
>
> We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
>
> but
>
> functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail without the business license.
>
> What we need is
>
> Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
>
> and we have a stack with sample code
>   one card script with all functions that work in Indy
>   one card script with all functions that work in Business only
>
>
> Svasti Astu, Be Well
> Brahmanathaswami
> www.himalayanacademy.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami
Would rather not piece-meal this:

For the sake of the product (to keep new developers from cursing LC)

Let's get documentation: simple:

All commands/methods that will work with Indy and any standalone built with Indy

All commands/methods that are business license only

+ ideally: sample stack with 1 card script for each of the above.

BR

On 12/26/16, 7:14 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Skip Kimpel" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

    What features are you getting "unlicensed" for?
   
    SKIP
   
    >On Dec 26, 2016, at 9:03 PM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami <[hidden email]> wrote:
    >We need some help.
    >We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
    >but
    >functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail without the business license.
    >What we need is
    >Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
    >and we have a stack with sample code
    >   one card script with all functions that work in Indy
    >   one card script with all functions that work in Business only
    >Svasti Astu, Be Well
    >Brahmanathaswami
    >www.himalayanacademy.com

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Skip Kimpel
I agree but I am also about to launch a product that uses the SFTP functionality and am curious about what feature you are getting that message for so I don't have any surprises.

SKIP

> On Dec 27, 2016, at 8:58 AM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Would rather not piece-meal this:
>
> For the sake of the product (to keep new developers from cursing LC)
>
> Let's get documentation: simple:
>
> All commands/methods that will work with Indy and any standalone built with Indy
>
> All commands/methods that are business license only
>
> + ideally: sample stack with 1 card script for each of the above.
>
> BR
>
> On 12/26/16, 7:14 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Skip Kimpel" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>    What features are you getting "unlicensed" for?
>
>    SKIP
>
>> On Dec 26, 2016, at 9:03 PM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> We need some help.
>> We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
>> but
>> functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail without the business license.
>> What we need is
>> Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
>> and we have a stack with sample code
>>  one card script with all functions that work in Indy
>>  one card script with all functions that work in Business only
>> Svasti Astu, Be Well
>> Brahmanathaswami
>> www.himalayanacademy.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Richard Gaskin
In reply to this post by Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami
Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:

 > We need some help.
 >
 > We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
 >
 > but
 >
 > functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even
 > when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail
 > without the business license.
 >
 > What we need is
 >
 > Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.

There's probably a more intuitive taxonomic placement for this (though
admittedly I can't decide on one offhand - suggestions?), but I poked
around the livecode.com site and discovered that if I click "Pricing"
then about the middle of the price comparison page is a link labeled
"Compare Networking Fearures", which leads to this page that offers a
breakdown by edition:

<https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/livecode-networking-layer/>

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Andre Garzia-3
Hey,

Yes, we found that page as well. The problem is that even though the page
lists features available to each license, there is no list of commands and
functions per license. For example, it says that public key authentication
is only available to business license holders, so we'd assume that if we
call tsNetUploadFileSync passing a username and password as an SFTP URL,
should work but it doesn't. Then we'd look into the docs and see that we
can pass a settings array with username and password which also doesn't
work.

When I say "doesn't work", I don't mean it is buggy, I mean it returns an
error saying the external is unlicensed. Which will probably make me
fallback to using shell commands to scp/sftp/rsync or whatever I need to
make file transfers.

This "escalation of features" for file transfers based on your license for
me is cumbersome as I am more prone to use other solutions than stay inside
LC but this is a whole different thread.

What I think would be useful and not disruptive to HQ business model is
more info about this license limitations inside the LC dictionary. When you
look at a given entry there, you don't see this info.

om om
andre
PS: It has been a while hasn't it?

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Richard Gaskin <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:
>
> > We need some help.
> >
> > We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
> >
> > but
> >
> > functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even
> > when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail
> > without the business license.
> >
> > What we need is
> >
> > Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
>
> There's probably a more intuitive taxonomic placement for this (though
> admittedly I can't decide on one offhand - suggestions?), but I poked
> around the livecode.com site and discovered that if I click "Pricing"
> then about the middle of the price comparison page is a link labeled
> "Compare Networking Fearures", which leads to this page that offers a
> breakdown by edition:
>
> <https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/livecode-
> networking-layer/>
>
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Systems
>  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>  ____________________________________________________________________
>  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



--
http://www.andregarzia.com -- All We Do Is Code.
http://fon.nu -- minimalist url shortening service.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Charles Warwick
Hi Andre,

I will be adding a fair amount of documentation for tsNet over the
coming weeks that I hope will better answer a number of the questions
that are being asked on the list.

In the mean time, I hope that the following two points will explain what
is happening for you.


1.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed in "blocking"
operations.

This means if you call any of the non-blocking variants of the libUrl or
tsNet commands/functions with these protocols, you will get an error.

For libUrl commands, non-blocking commands are:

"load url", "libUrlDownloadToFile", "libUrlFtpUpload", "libUrlFtpUploadFile"

For tsNet commands, non-blocking functions are:

"tsNetGet", "tsNetGetFile", "tsNetUpload", "tsNetUploadFile",
"tsNetSmtp", "tsNetSmtpFile", "tsNetSendCmd", "tsNetPost", "tsNetHead",
"tsNetCustom"


2.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed to/from a
variable - not directly using a file.

This means you will also get an error if you use any of the blocking
functions which directly reference a file when using these protocols.

For tsNet, these functions are:

"tsNetGetFileSync", "tsNetUploadFileSync", "tsNetSmtpFileSync"


Cheers,

Charles


On 28/12/2016 5:31 AM, Andre Garzia wrote:

> Hey,
>
> Yes, we found that page as well. The problem is that even though the page
> lists features available to each license, there is no list of commands and
> functions per license. For example, it says that public key authentication
> is only available to business license holders, so we'd assume that if we
> call tsNetUploadFileSync passing a username and password as an SFTP URL,
> should work but it doesn't. Then we'd look into the docs and see that we
> can pass a settings array with username and password which also doesn't
> work.
>
> When I say "doesn't work", I don't mean it is buggy, I mean it returns an
> error saying the external is unlicensed. Which will probably make me
> fallback to using shell commands to scp/sftp/rsync or whatever I need to
> make file transfers.
>
> This "escalation of features" for file transfers based on your license for
> me is cumbersome as I am more prone to use other solutions than stay inside
> LC but this is a whole different thread.
>
> What I think would be useful and not disruptive to HQ business model is
> more info about this license limitations inside the LC dictionary. When you
> look at a given entry there, you don't see this info.
>
> om om
> andre
> PS: It has been a while hasn't it?
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Richard Gaskin <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:
>>
>>> We need some help.
>>>
>>> We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
>>>
>>> but
>>>
>>> functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even
>>> when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail
>>> without the business license.
>>>
>>> What we need is
>>>
>>> Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
>> There's probably a more intuitive taxonomic placement for this (though
>> admittedly I can't decide on one offhand - suggestions?), but I poked
>> around the livecode.com site and discovered that if I click "Pricing"
>> then about the middle of the price comparison page is a link labeled
>> "Compare Networking Fearures", which leads to this page that offers a
>> breakdown by edition:
>>
>> <https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/livecode-
>> networking-layer/>
>>
>> --
>>   Richard Gaskin
>>   Fourth World Systems
>>   Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>>   ____________________________________________________________________
>>   [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>
>


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Roger Eller
I am really disappointed that SFTP (for Indy) is limited to a variable
(RAM) -vs- writing directly to a file.  Moving large files that exceed
system RAM is very common.

~Roger

On Dec 30, 2016 5:13 AM, "Charles Warwick" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Andre,
>
> I will be adding a fair amount of documentation for tsNet over the coming
> weeks that I hope will better answer a number of the questions that are
> being asked on the list.
>
> In the mean time, I hope that the following two points will explain what
> is happening for you.
>
>
> 1.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed in "blocking"
> operations.
>
> This means if you call any of the non-blocking variants of the libUrl or
> tsNet commands/functions with these protocols, you will get an error.
>
> For libUrl commands, non-blocking commands are:
>
> "load url", "libUrlDownloadToFile", "libUrlFtpUpload",
> "libUrlFtpUploadFile"
>
> For tsNet commands, non-blocking functions are:
>
> "tsNetGet", "tsNetGetFile", "tsNetUpload", "tsNetUploadFile", "tsNetSmtp",
> "tsNetSmtpFile", "tsNetSendCmd", "tsNetPost", "tsNetHead", "tsNetCustom"
>
>
> 2.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed to/from a variable
> - not directly using a file.
>
> This means you will also get an error if you use any of the blocking
> functions which directly reference a file when using these protocols.
>
> For tsNet, these functions are:
>
> "tsNetGetFileSync", "tsNetUploadFileSync", "tsNetSmtpFileSync"
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Charles
>
>
> On 28/12/2016 5:31 AM, Andre Garzia wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> Yes, we found that page as well. The problem is that even though the page
>> lists features available to each license, there is no list of commands and
>> functions per license. For example, it says that public key authentication
>> is only available to business license holders, so we'd assume that if we
>> call tsNetUploadFileSync passing a username and password as an SFTP URL,
>> should work but it doesn't. Then we'd look into the docs and see that we
>> can pass a settings array with username and password which also doesn't
>> work.
>>
>> When I say "doesn't work", I don't mean it is buggy, I mean it returns an
>> error saying the external is unlicensed. Which will probably make me
>> fallback to using shell commands to scp/sftp/rsync or whatever I need to
>> make file transfers.
>>
>> This "escalation of features" for file transfers based on your license for
>> me is cumbersome as I am more prone to use other solutions than stay
>> inside
>> LC but this is a whole different thread.
>>
>> What I think would be useful and not disruptive to HQ business model is
>> more info about this license limitations inside the LC dictionary. When
>> you
>> look at a given entry there, you don't see this info.
>>
>> om om
>> andre
>> PS: It has been a while hasn't it?
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Richard Gaskin <
>> [hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:
>>>
>>> We need some help.
>>>>
>>>> We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
>>>>
>>>> but
>>>>
>>>> functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even
>>>> when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail
>>>> without the business license.
>>>>
>>>> What we need is
>>>>
>>>> Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
>>>>
>>> There's probably a more intuitive taxonomic placement for this (though
>>> admittedly I can't decide on one offhand - suggestions?), but I poked
>>> around the livecode.com site and discovered that if I click "Pricing"
>>> then about the middle of the price comparison page is a link labeled
>>> "Compare Networking Fearures", which leads to this page that offers a
>>> breakdown by edition:
>>>
>>> <https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/livecode-
>>> networking-layer/>
>>>
>>> --
>>>   Richard Gaskin
>>>   Fourth World Systems
>>>   Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>>>   ____________________________________________________________________
>>>   [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Skip Kimpel
+1

LC needs to reconsider breaking up functionality based upon licensing.

SKIP

> On Dec 30, 2016, at 6:40 AM, Roger Eller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I am really disappointed that SFTP (for Indy) is limited to a variable
> (RAM) -vs- writing directly to a file.  Moving large files that exceed
> system RAM is very common.
>
> ~Roger
>
> On Dec 30, 2016 5:13 AM, "Charles Warwick" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andre,
>>
>> I will be adding a fair amount of documentation for tsNet over the coming
>> weeks that I hope will better answer a number of the questions that are
>> being asked on the list.
>>
>> In the mean time, I hope that the following two points will explain what
>> is happening for you.
>>
>>
>> 1.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed in "blocking"
>> operations.
>>
>> This means if you call any of the non-blocking variants of the libUrl or
>> tsNet commands/functions with these protocols, you will get an error.
>>
>> For libUrl commands, non-blocking commands are:
>>
>> "load url", "libUrlDownloadToFile", "libUrlFtpUpload",
>> "libUrlFtpUploadFile"
>>
>> For tsNet commands, non-blocking functions are:
>>
>> "tsNetGet", "tsNetGetFile", "tsNetUpload", "tsNetUploadFile", "tsNetSmtp",
>> "tsNetSmtpFile", "tsNetSendCmd", "tsNetPost", "tsNetHead", "tsNetCustom"
>>
>>
>> 2.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed to/from a variable
>> - not directly using a file.
>>
>> This means you will also get an error if you use any of the blocking
>> functions which directly reference a file when using these protocols.
>>
>> For tsNet, these functions are:
>>
>> "tsNetGetFileSync", "tsNetUploadFileSync", "tsNetSmtpFileSync"
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Charles
>>
>>
>>> On 28/12/2016 5:31 AM, Andre Garzia wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Yes, we found that page as well. The problem is that even though the page
>>> lists features available to each license, there is no list of commands and
>>> functions per license. For example, it says that public key authentication
>>> is only available to business license holders, so we'd assume that if we
>>> call tsNetUploadFileSync passing a username and password as an SFTP URL,
>>> should work but it doesn't. Then we'd look into the docs and see that we
>>> can pass a settings array with username and password which also doesn't
>>> work.
>>>
>>> When I say "doesn't work", I don't mean it is buggy, I mean it returns an
>>> error saying the external is unlicensed. Which will probably make me
>>> fallback to using shell commands to scp/sftp/rsync or whatever I need to
>>> make file transfers.
>>>
>>> This "escalation of features" for file transfers based on your license for
>>> me is cumbersome as I am more prone to use other solutions than stay
>>> inside
>>> LC but this is a whole different thread.
>>>
>>> What I think would be useful and not disruptive to HQ business model is
>>> more info about this license limitations inside the LC dictionary. When
>>> you
>>> look at a given entry there, you don't see this info.
>>>
>>> om om
>>> andre
>>> PS: It has been a while hasn't it?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Richard Gaskin <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We need some help.
>>>>>
>>>>> We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
>>>>>
>>>>> but
>>>>>
>>>>> functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even
>>>>> when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail
>>>>> without the business license.
>>>>>
>>>>> What we need is
>>>>>
>>>>> Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
>>>>>
>>>> There's probably a more intuitive taxonomic placement for this (though
>>>> admittedly I can't decide on one offhand - suggestions?), but I poked
>>>> around the livecode.com site and discovered that if I click "Pricing"
>>>> then about the middle of the price comparison page is a link labeled
>>>> "Compare Networking Fearures", which leads to this page that offers a
>>>> breakdown by edition:
>>>>
>>>> <https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/livecode-
>>>> networking-layer/>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>  Richard Gaskin
>>>>  Fourth World Systems
>>>>  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>>>>  ____________________________________________________________________
>>>>  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>>> subscription preferences:
>>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Colin Kelly
In reply to this post by Roger Eller
+1

On 30/12/2016, 11:40, "use-livecode on behalf of Roger Eller" <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

    I am really disappointed that SFTP (for Indy) is limited to a variable
    (RAM) -vs- writing directly to a file.  Moving large files that exceed
    system RAM is very common.
   
    ~Roger
   
    On Dec 30, 2016 5:13 AM, "Charles Warwick" <[hidden email]>
    wrote:
   
    > Hi Andre,
    >
    > I will be adding a fair amount of documentation for tsNet over the coming
    > weeks that I hope will better answer a number of the questions that are
    > being asked on the list.
    >
    > In the mean time, I hope that the following two points will explain what
    > is happening for you.
    >
    >
    > 1.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed in "blocking"
    > operations.
    >
    > This means if you call any of the non-blocking variants of the libUrl or
    > tsNet commands/functions with these protocols, you will get an error.
    >
    > For libUrl commands, non-blocking commands are:
    >
    > "load url", "libUrlDownloadToFile", "libUrlFtpUpload",
    > "libUrlFtpUploadFile"
    >
    > For tsNet commands, non-blocking functions are:
    >
    > "tsNetGet", "tsNetGetFile", "tsNetUpload", "tsNetUploadFile", "tsNetSmtp",
    > "tsNetSmtpFile", "tsNetSendCmd", "tsNetPost", "tsNetHead", "tsNetCustom"
    >
    >
    > 2.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed to/from a variable
    > - not directly using a file.
    >
    > This means you will also get an error if you use any of the blocking
    > functions which directly reference a file when using these protocols.
    >
    > For tsNet, these functions are:
    >
    > "tsNetGetFileSync", "tsNetUploadFileSync", "tsNetSmtpFileSync"
    >
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Charles
    >
    >
    > On 28/12/2016 5:31 AM, Andre Garzia wrote:
    >
    >> Hey,
    >>
    >> Yes, we found that page as well. The problem is that even though the page
    >> lists features available to each license, there is no list of commands and
    >> functions per license. For example, it says that public key authentication
    >> is only available to business license holders, so we'd assume that if we
    >> call tsNetUploadFileSync passing a username and password as an SFTP URL,
    >> should work but it doesn't. Then we'd look into the docs and see that we
    >> can pass a settings array with username and password which also doesn't
    >> work.
    >>
    >> When I say "doesn't work", I don't mean it is buggy, I mean it returns an
    >> error saying the external is unlicensed. Which will probably make me
    >> fallback to using shell commands to scp/sftp/rsync or whatever I need to
    >> make file transfers.
    >>
    >> This "escalation of features" for file transfers based on your license for
    >> me is cumbersome as I am more prone to use other solutions than stay
    >> inside
    >> LC but this is a whole different thread.
    >>
    >> What I think would be useful and not disruptive to HQ business model is
    >> more info about this license limitations inside the LC dictionary. When
    >> you
    >> look at a given entry there, you don't see this info.
    >>
    >> om om
    >> andre
    >> PS: It has been a while hasn't it?
    >>
    >> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Richard Gaskin <
    >> [hidden email]>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >> Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:
    >>>
    >>> We need some help.
    >>>>
    >>>> We know that we can do SFTP with TS-Net external
    >>>>
    >>>> but
    >>>>
    >>>> functions that we try to use from an Indy LC return "unlicensed" even
    >>>> when, the documentation make not indication that they should fail
    >>>> without the business license.
    >>>>
    >>>> What we need is
    >>>>
    >>>> Documention on what functions and methods work for SFTP in Indy.
    >>>>
    >>> There's probably a more intuitive taxonomic placement for this (though
    >>> admittedly I can't decide on one offhand - suggestions?), but I poked
    >>> around the livecode.com site and discovered that if I click "Pricing"
    >>> then about the middle of the price comparison page is a link labeled
    >>> "Compare Networking Fearures", which leads to this page that offers a
    >>> breakdown by edition:
    >>>
    >>> <https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/livecode-
    >>> networking-layer/>
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>>   Richard Gaskin
    >>>   Fourth World Systems
    >>>   Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
    >>>   ____________________________________________________________________
    >>>   [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> _______________________________________________
    >>> use-livecode mailing list
    >>> [hidden email]
    >>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
    >>> subscription preferences:
    >>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > use-livecode mailing list
    > [hidden email]
    > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
    > subscription preferences:
    > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
    >
    _______________________________________________
    use-livecode mailing list
    [hidden email]
    Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
    http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
   



_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Andre Garzia-3
In reply to this post by Charles Warwick
Charles,

Thanks a lot for the quick reply! Things are much clearer now. I have some
comments below.

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 12:13 AM, Charles Warwick <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2.  For Indy users, SFTP and SMTP can only be performed to/from a variable
> - not directly using a file.
>
> This means you will also get an error if you use any of the blocking
> functions which directly reference a file when using these protocols.
>
> For tsNet, these functions are:
>
> "tsNetGetFileSync", "tsNetUploadFileSync", "tsNetSmtpFileSync"
>


This above is really unfortunate. We are uploading backups of our large
media assets. We're talking about files here that can weight more than
100mb. We shouldn't need to allocate this amount of space into a variable,
this is not sound. What if we're trying to upload a movie that is 2gb or
3gb? We can't realistically be expected to place such large amount of data
into variables.

This kind of arbitrary limitations of functionally makes it impossible for
us to use the new external in a pleasant way. Inserting huge amounts of
data into variables just to please licensing is not my idea of good memory
usage.

I really hope HQ reconsider the above limitation, it makes for some very
bad practices of memory allocation.

om om
andre

--
http://www.andregarzia.com -- All We Do Is Code.
http://fon.nu -- minimalist url shortening service.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami
In reply to this post by Skip Kimpel
SFTP var content only?

Wow… Strange strategy… Indy should/could be LC's bread and butter.. a product that works may be a better strategy in the long run than providing a crippled option. Reserve business only feature for true enterprise features, not for a simple options that come with any modern $15.00 app that lets you set sharing to your own server (and uploads files by SFTP). There's a "kajillion" web developers, including "your little sister" out there whose servers are all blocking FTP in the clear…

BR


Skip Kimpel  wrote:

    +1
   
    LC needs to reconsider breaking up functionality based upon licensing.
   
    SKIP

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

William Prothero
Charles:
It also seems to me like this is a vital feature that could cripple some applications. I agree with the other posters that the Indy version will probably be purchased by the great majority of those who purchase licenses. It “should” be a big market.

Best,
Bill

> Skip Kimpel  wrote:
>
>    +1
>
>    LC needs to reconsider breaking up functionality based upon licensing.
>
>    SKIP
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
Hi Bill and others,

I appreciate the feedback regarding the feature breakdown between the
different licenses.

The decision to split the features (and how they were split) across
Business and Indy was decided on by the LiveCode team.

I expect that some of them may have seen this thread, however I
recommend contacting them directly if you want to ensure that they hear
your thoughts.

Regards,

Charles


On 4/01/2017 7:47 AM, William Prothero wrote:

> Charles:
> It also seems to me like this is a vital feature that could cripple some applications. I agree with the other posters that the Indy version will probably be purchased by the great majority of those who purchase licenses. It “should” be a big market.
>
> Best,
> Bill
>
>> Skip Kimpel  wrote:
>>
>>     +1
>>
>>     LC needs to reconsider breaking up functionality based upon licensing.
>>
>>     SKIP
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Skip Kimpel
On 30 Dec 2016, at 12:41, Skip Kimpel wrote:

> +1
>
> LC needs to reconsider breaking up functionality based upon licensing.

Indeed! I haven't looked in depth at the differences, but I thought it
was more (or even entirely) about support, which makes sense for
high-level business requirements, plus a turnover threshold, which is
about common sense (appropriate recompense for lucrative use). With the
open-source Community edition, only allowing open-source standalones is
eminently logical. But limiting functionality in the way just revealed
feels decidedly unfriendly, a bit like devs are being milked.

:'(

k


---

Keith Martin
Senior Lecturer, LCC (University of the Arts London)
Technical Editor, MacUser magazine (1997-2015)
http://PanoramaPhotographer.com
http://thatkeith.com
+44 (0)7909541365

---
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
"A bit like devs are being milked" seems a somewhat extraordinary statement. LiveCode is a business, with expenses and a stable of highly skilled and valuable developers. Which of them would you like us to fire? We need to pay for LiveCode's development so that all of the users in the community can continue to use it, receive new features and develop their apps. If you want features for free, LiveCode Community is Open Source. Here is the link to github:

https://github.com/livecode/ <https://github.com/livecode/>

We welcome all the coding assistance you can give us. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of the work is still done by our in-house team, and the majority of the work we do goes into all editions including open source.

The new tsNet features are great. They do not take anything away from Community, which still has liburl as it always did. They were costly to develop and license and will now require maintenance from our team. Some are in Indy and some are in Business, where we can receive the appropriate level of remuneration for them, allowing us to retain our extremely valuable team and bring you the best LiveCode we can.

Warm Regards and Happy New Year!

Heather

Heather Laine
Customer Services Manager
LiveCode Ltd
www.livecode.com



> On 6 Jan 2017, at 10:30, Keith Martin via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 30 Dec 2016, at 12:41, Skip Kimpel wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> LC needs to reconsider breaking up functionality based upon licensing.
>
> Indeed! I haven't looked in depth at the differences, but I thought it was more (or even entirely) about support, which makes sense for high-level business requirements, plus a turnover threshold, which is about common sense (appropriate recompense for lucrative use). With the open-source Community edition, only allowing open-source standalones is eminently logical. But limiting functionality in the way just revealed feels decidedly unfriendly, a bit like devs are being milked.
>
> :'(
>
> k
>
>
> ---
>
> Keith Martin
> Senior Lecturer, LCC (University of the Arts London)
> Technical Editor, MacUser magazine (1997-2015)
> http://PanoramaPhotographer.com
> http://thatkeith.com
> +44 (0)7909541365
>
> ---
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
On 6 Jan 2017, at 12:49, Heather Laine via use-livecode wrote:

> "A bit like devs are being milked" seems a somewhat extraordinary
> statement. LiveCode is a business, with expenses and a stable of
> highly skilled and valuable developers.

I meant this in the traditional 'online pushy chatty' manner, not as an
actual accusation. I apologise fully, I expressed myself badly. Mea
maxima culpa.

 From the point of view of those of us who have seen the product's full
evolution it has unarguably moved into a very different realm as far as
charges are concerned. I have a natural and ingrained dislike of ongoing
costs, in part because I'm an old industry fart and in part because I
use a *lot* of different software and use the vast majority on an
occasional basis so I prefer to buy rather than rent in order to keep a
lid on my outgoings. (The only ongoing 'rent' payment models that I have
are with Adobe and LiveCode. Both are valuable to me, although not
really in the financial sense. I am indy in many senses of the word!)

I am still disappointed that HTML5 turned out to be not part of the
regular set of Indy output options. I may well have misunderstood this
from the start... it won't be the first time. :-/

k


---

Keith Martin
Senior Lecturer, LCC (University of the Arts London)
Technical Editor, MacUser magazine (1997-2015)
http://PanoramaPhotographer.com
http://thatkeith.com
+44 (0)7909541365

---
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
Exactly what I was thinking when I read it. My greatest aprehension in using Livecode is that one day it will be gone, and I will have to learn to use C++ or Objective C, which is to say I will have to give up software development. I'm not really sure how they stay afloat as is, but as I develop strictly for in house use for my company, and not because they want me to either, but because I happen to know that what I have created for them vastly simplifies and streamlines my workflow and that of my techs, all that to say that I pay for LC development out of pocket. the $700 a year hurts. But I pay it because I need the features Indy offers, and I also think  that if I am not going to contribute to the open source project (like I have anything to contribute) then my paying for the Indy license once a year is my way of supporting it.

I suppose it is how you choose to look at things. I remember getting really excited about Filemake Standalones until I discovered I would have to pay a distribution fee for *every single instance* of a distributed app!!! Oh yeah, and developing for Filemaker sucks goose eggs. Also I come from a background of Procedural Foxpro where creating a form meant "saying" text at different window coordinates, then "getting" whatever the user typed in. There was no program interaction during a read. No events triggered. Foxpro was in a coma. And, it took forever to write and troubleshoot even minor changes, compared to Livecode.

You can write a functional utility in a matter of minutes, debug it in a few hours, make it pretty inside of a day. Compile and distribute it no charge. AND they offer a free edition. I'm not sure anyone has any room to complain here.

Bob S


On Jan 6, 2017, at 04:49 , Heather Laine via use-livecode <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

"A bit like devs are being milked" seems a somewhat extraordinary statement.

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
I totally agree with you and could not have said  it better.



> Am 06.01.2017 um 17:09 schrieb Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>
> Exactly what I was thinking when I read it. My greatest aprehension in using Livecode is that one day it will be gone, and I will have to learn to use C++ or Objective C, which is to say I will have to give up software development. I'm not really sure how they stay afloat as is, but as I develop strictly for in house use for my company, and not because they want me to either, but because I happen to know that what I have created for them vastly simplifies and streamlines my workflow and that of my techs, all that to say that I pay for LC development out of pocket. the $700 a year hurts. But I pay it because I need the features Indy offers, and I also think  that if I am not going to contribute to the open source project (like I have anything to contribute) then my paying for the Indy license once a year is my way of supporting it.
>
> I suppose it is how you choose to look at things. I remember getting really excited about Filemake Standalones until I discovered I would have to pay a distribution fee for *every single instance* of a distributed app!!! Oh yeah, and developing for Filemaker sucks goose eggs. Also I come from a background of Procedural Foxpro where creating a form meant "saying" text at different window coordinates, then "getting" whatever the user typed in. There was no program interaction during a read. No events triggered. Foxpro was in a coma. And, it took forever to write and troubleshoot even minor changes, compared to Livecode.
>
> You can write a functional utility in a matter of minutes, debug it in a few hours, make it pretty inside of a day. Compile and distribute it no charge. AND they offer a free edition. I'm not sure anyone has any room to complain here.
>
> Bob S
>
>
> On Jan 6, 2017, at 04:49 , Heather Laine via use-livecode <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]><mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>
> "A bit like devs are being milked" seems a somewhat extraordinary statement.
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Trevor DeVore via use-livecode
+1
Well said.
... there's no way I can justify the expense other than to tell myself I'm
supporting something worthwhile in about the only way I can.
Jim M.

-----Original Message-----
From: use-livecode [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 8:10 AM
To: How to use LiveCode
Cc: Bob Sneidar
Subject: Re: TS Net for Indy vs Business

Exactly what I was thinking when I read it. My greatest aprehension in using
Livecode is that one day it will be gone, and I will have to learn to use
C++ or Objective C, which is to say I will have to give up software
development. I'm not really sure how they stay afloat as is, but as I
develop strictly for in house use for my company, and not because they want
me to either, but because I happen to know that what I have created for them
vastly simplifies and streamlines my workflow and that of my techs, all that
to say that I pay for LC development out of pocket. the $700 a year hurts.
But I pay it because I need the features Indy offers, and I also think  that
if I am not going to contribute to the open source project (like I have
anything to contribute) then my paying for the Indy license once a year is
my way of supporting it.

I suppose it is how you choose to look at things. I remember getting really
excited about Filemake Standalones until I discovered I would have to pay a
distribution fee for *every single instance* of a distributed app!!! Oh
yeah, and developing for Filemaker sucks goose eggs. Also I come from a
background of Procedural Foxpro where creating a form meant "saying" text at
different window coordinates, then "getting" whatever the user typed in.
There was no program interaction during a read. No events triggered. Foxpro
was in a coma. And, it took forever to write and troubleshoot even minor
changes, compared to Livecode.

You can write a functional utility in a matter of minutes, debug it in a few
hours, make it pretty inside of a day. Compile and distribute it no charge.
AND they offer a free edition. I'm not sure anyone has any room to complain
here.

Bob S


On Jan 6, 2017, at 04:49 , Heather Laine via use-livecode
<[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

"A bit like devs are being milked" seems a somewhat extraordinary statement.

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
12