Third party Patch Manager

Eric Chatonet eric.chatonet at
Fri Jul 15 09:15:24 EDT 2005

Hi Jim,

Your idea is a good idea, but is it to us to make for free Rev job  
that they asked us to pay for?
As for the patches I write:

. They test the running version in order to tell if the patch is  
. They test if the patch has been already applied or not.
. They save the current stack as <stack name old> in order to let the  
user reverse the process if needed.
. They apply the patch only when all conditions have been filled.

Can I do more?

Finally, a *Third party patch manager* makes me feel weird...

Le 15 juil. 05 à 14:30, Jim Bufalini a écrit :

> Anyone out there have a *Third party patch manager stack?*
> By this I mean, I've applied some patches provided by Chipp and  
> Eric and
> maybe others. I forget exactly, and this is my point. For example,  
> I'm still
> running 2.51 and *trying* to get to 2.6. I say trying, because my  
> 2.51 key
> didn't unlock 2.6 and I've requested another key, but haven't  
> gotten it
> yet - but that's another story.
> The point is, I know that 2.6 will require some of the same patches  
> applied
> as 2.51. However, it may not need others, and I may not remember  
> exactly
> what patches I applied prior, that need to be applied to the newer  
> version
> (until, I suppose, a problem occurs and I remember I have a patch  
> for that,
> although I probably won't remember who wrote it, and where I got it  
> from).
> It would be nice, if when I apply a patch, I could drag it to a Patch
> Manager stack that, when I upgrade to newer versions, would show all
> previously applied patches with checkboxes, and I could choose to  
> apply the
> patch or not. Maybe a date of when the patch was applied (dragged  
> into the
> manager), so I can remember what version I applied the patch to.
> Otherwise, I can see myself hesitating to upgrade and cut over to a  
> newer
> *official* version of Rev.
> A MUCH BETTER alternative (hint, hint) to this would be for Rev,  
> itself, to
> maintain a Third Party Patches web page for developers, where  
> developers
> could post their patches (instead of their individual WebPages) and  
> Rev
> could edit the descriptions and categorize them by version number,  
> as being
> applicable to a version.
> For example the recent app browser fix from Eric might be  
> classified as:
> Applies to versions 2.51 to 2.6xx ONLY. Prior versions do not  
> require this
> patch, and as of version 2.6yy, it's no longer applicable, as we  
> took the
> silly if...then statement out ourselves. (OK, put a period after  
> the word
> *applicable*).
> This would take some of the *fear* out of upgrading and in the long  
> run make
> Rev more money...

Best Regards from Paris,

Eric Chatonet.
So Smart Software

For institutions, companies and associations
Built-to-order applications: management, multimedia, internet, etc.
Windows, Mac OS and Linux... With the French touch

Free plugins and tutorials on my website
Web site
Email        eric.chatonet at
Phone        33 (0)1 43 31 77 62
Mobile        33 (0)6 20 74 50 86

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list