Embedded designer

[Pascal]

The only difference i see is that the not recognized one is the only auto create form.

[af0815]

I hope this will be backported to the fixes Branch :-) after a cooling down.

[balazsszekely]

@Pascal

The only difference i see is that the not recognized one is the only auto create form.

Thanks. I will take a look later. Most likely is related to FPC trunk, because it works fine with 3.0.4.

@af0815

I hope this will be backported to the fixes Branch :-) after a cooling down.

It's not a bug fix, unfortunately it won't make it to the fixes branch, this is considered "new development", although in this particular case new is not an appropriate expression.

@MacWomble

Great Work!
I like this Designer

No surprise here(after we look at your signature).

[MacWomble]

I tested with two large projects and all works fine here (Mint 19.3 64Bit) 

@Getmem
My signature was wrong  , it's right now 

[dsiders]

I applaud the initiative. To be honest, I never understood why this was left to less-than-cooperative third party.

Using:

FPC 3.0.4
Lazarus 2.1 SVN rev 62735
Windows 8.1 64-bit

The following are not criticisms, just my observations.

Works mostly as expected for me, but there are issues.

* The Form never gets a selection rectangle/rubberband/doodad. (I don't know if it should, but it seems off to me).
* Title bar does not render BorderIcons or other decorations.
* I cannot activate the form in the object inspector by clicking on the title bar (pressing escape works though).
* Title bar makes no effort to emulate the appearance on Windows using system metrics/font/size. (Is this  is a cross-platform issue?)

* Using Tab or Shift-Tab keyboard navigation moves to controls that are not visible on the form.

* The last is just a thought... move the toggle for the preview pane to the unused area between scrollbars. This would allow the button panel to be center aligned to the preview panel. Lik eI said... just a thought.

It's a really good start.

Can we expect IDE Docking in the future?

[Sternas Stefanos]

from Typhon COPYING.txt CodeTyphon Studio ver 7.00

ct_about.pas
ct_apimatrixform.pas
ct_basefunctions.pas
ct_componentlist.pas
ct_emb_basics.pas
ct_emb_formeditor.pas
ct_emb_notebook.pas
ct_mproject.pas
ct_mprojecteditor.pas
ct_popupcomppages.pas
ct_popuppkgs.pas
ct_loggerform.pas
typhon.ctpr
typhon.pp
typhonbuild.ctpr
typhonbuild.ppr
typhonstart.ctpr
typhonstart.ppr
These files are property of PilotLogic.

Did you have permition from PilotLogic to use these file to Lazarus IDE ?

[skalogryz]

Did you have permition from PilotLogic to use these file to Lazarus IDE ?

is there an issue? it's GPL licensed.

[Sternas Stefanos]

No Sir
it's NOT GPL licensed

ct_emb_basics.pas
ct_emb_formeditor.pas
ct_emb_notebook.pas

are PilotLogic property

Please, remove our unlicensed files from Lazarus IDE.

[skalogryz]

it's NOT GPL licensed

ct_emb_basics.pas
ct_emb_formeditor.pas
ct_emb_notebook.pas

ah.. i see.
Is Code Typhon using GPLed parts of Lazarus?

[BeRo]

... Please, remove our unlicensed files from Lazarus IDE.

If you do not withdraw your request, then I would like to request you to remove the following from CodeTyphon:

pl_Kraft (which is my project)
pl_Pappe (what is also my older project)
pl_Vulkan (where the generator is based on the one from my PasVulkan project without permission and also contains no mention of my name as credits, and the code style of the generated vulkanlib.pas pascal code from the vk.xml is recognizable from my vk2pas.dpr from my PasVulkan project) 

and the PasGLTF, PasJSON and PasDblStrUtils files at pl_CastleEngine, the DLLLoader and the ASIO wrapper stuff from pl_ASIOVST, these are also from me or based on my code work.

because there's about the same problem, just here in the other direction.

It's your choice.

[dsiders]

... Please, remove our unlicensed files from Lazarus IDE.

If you do not withdraw your request, then I would like to request you to remove the following from CodeTyphon:

pl_Kraft (which is my project)
pl_Pappe (what is also my older project)
pl_Vulkan (where the generator is based on the one from my PasVulkan project without permission and also contains no mention of my name as credits, and the code style of the generated vulkanlib.pas pascal code from the vk.xml is recognizable from my vk2pas.dpr from my PasVulkan project) 

because there's about the same problem, just here in the other direction.

It's your choice.

Okay, lemme get some popcorn...

[Sternas Stefanos]

The problem, is that the above files
ct_emb_basics.pas
ct_emb_formeditor.pas
ct_emb_notebook.pas

are property of PilotLogic.
Please, remove our unlicensed files from Lazarus IDE
and this is my last warning...

I will NOT write anything else.
Good Luck...

[Handoko]

First of all I'm not a lawyer, what I'm going to say could be wrong. Second, I respect both Lazarus's and Code Typhon's developers, I'm not interested in any kind of fight and I hope the issue can be solve peacefully.

- I heard a lot of people said, Code Typhon was a fork of Lazarus.
- Lazarus itself is licensed under GPL
- GPL has 'viral' nature

The GPL is clear in requiring that all derivative works of code under the GPL must themselves be under the GPL. Ambiguity arises with regards to using GPL libraries, and bundling GPL software into a larger package (perhaps mixed into a binary via static linking).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Linking_and_derived_works

The mere act of communicating with other programs does not, by itself, require all software to be GPL; nor does distributing GPL software with non-GPL software. However, minor conditions must be followed that ensures the rights of GPL software is not restricted.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Communicating_and_bundling_with_non-GPL_programs

According to the quotes above, any derivative works need to be in GPL unless for bundling the software and for libraries, which is merely communicating with other programs.

Anyway, because the original author of those 3 files already mentioned they are not willing to let those files being used in Lazarus, I think we should respect their decision no matter it is 'correct' or not in the license terms, we should write it our own.

That's my 2 cents.

[BeRo]

Since I have also a legal personal protection insurance for companies and businesses, which also cover such foreign cases against other companies and businesses, I am just thinking about whether I should really take legal action against CT or not, at least in the case of pl_Vulkan of the missing mention of my person at the generated vulkanlib.pas, but the other stuff are actually license-technically okay, since these are (l)gpl or zlib licensed from me. Because after all it would cost me 150 Euro insurance excess.   

So, what do you think, guys? What should I do? At least in the pl_Vulkan case it is a real shame on the side of Pilotlogic. 

[Handoko]

Please don't do it sir. The Pascal community isn't as large as in the past. You already mentioned that you wish they to remove the codes, let's give them time and see. Actually you can take legal action, but there always new 'bad guys' appear and losing money for them is not worth, unless they are commercial companies which you can sue them and get money.