Page 2 of 32

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 08 Jun 2019, 06:15
by AHKStudent
This works well. Thanks!

Any possible way to also change the program class name? Right now its AutoHotkeyGUI ?

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 08 Jun 2019, 14:39
by joedf
@TAC109 Awesome. About the compression option... I would do Checkbox|Dropdown:MPRESS/UPX|Label:(if present) ... Oh! and maybe the command-line option should be changed...
I screwed up my fork... :crazy: so I used the github website to make a minor change. I'll leave you to it for the other changes, I'll wait till lexikos merges it. Then I'll fork it again under an org, so it'll be easier for contib.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 08 Jun 2019, 16:08
by TAC109
@AHKStudent Thanks.
What is the problem with the program class name and why should it be changed?

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 08 Jun 2019, 17:58
by Randy31416
The temp files are gone! Thanks very much.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 08 Jun 2019, 21:18
by AHKStudent
TAC109 wrote:
08 Jun 2019, 16:08
@AHKStudent Thanks.
What is the problem with the program class name and why should it be changed?
if someone wants it changed, just like the other parts

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 09 Jun 2019, 03:09
by TAC109
AHKStudent wrote:
08 Jun 2019, 06:15
Any possible way to also change the program class name? Right now its AutoHotkeyGUI ?
It would be beyond the scope of Ahk2Exe to have this built in.

I see there are a number of ways of achieving this described on the forum; you could use the 'PostExec' directive to run a program to modify the generated .exe, changing the program class name.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 09 Jun 2019, 07:40
by ahk7
Perhaps change the license to GPL so it is the same as AHK? Currently it is WTFPL, it is a bit strange to see (c) Sam H. in there.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 09 Jun 2019, 23:40
by joedf
+1

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 10 Jun 2019, 00:08
by TAC109
I believe it is up to the original authors of Ahk2Exe to specify the licence under which the software is released.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 10 Jun 2019, 00:53
by joedf
True, but Sam Hocevar is no author of ahk2exe...

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 10 Jun 2019, 15:59
by TAC109
@joedf
True, but he’s the author of the licence...

You’ve contributed more to the development of Ahk2Exe than me, so If you want to alter the licence I’m not going to loose any sleep over it. :)

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 12 Jun 2019, 12:08
by joedf
oh! ahaha I get what you mean :lol:
Nono, you're supposed to change the copyright notice to indicate the author of the product it is applied to, it doesnt mean that Sam is not the author of the license. Usually the license should have something like (c) <year> <author> instead.
For example this here: https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/
That said, it doesnt really matter since it says to whatever you want... :hehe:
So really, we can leave as is. It's minor issue, I've already too much here ahah :P

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 24 Jun 2019, 03:04
by lexikos
ahk7 wrote:
09 Jun 2019, 07:40
Perhaps change the license to GPL so it is the same as AHK?
That is a very poor reason to change to a more restrictive license. I've heard better reasons to not use WTFPL, or to use GPL (which is not to say that I agreed). I use the GPL for AutoHotkey only because I cannot change it to a less restrictive license, as I am not the only copyright holder. The first version of the Ahk2Exe script, on the other hand, was most likely written from scratch by fincs. The copyright notices displayed by Ahk2Exe are arguably incorrect - the script imitates the original program but does not contain any of the original code or assets.
TAC109 wrote:
10 Jun 2019, 00:08
I believe it is up to the original authors of Ahk2Exe to specify the licence under which the software is released.
The current license indicates that you can re-license Ahk2Exe, remove the current license, and generally do whatever you want with the script.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 24 Jun 2019, 17:39
by TAC109
I have no desire to change the licence at this time.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 26 Jun 2019, 08:55
by joedf
@lexikos Any updates or comments on the pull request? https://github.com/Lexikos/Ahk2Exe/pull/1

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 26 Jun 2019, 19:33
by TAC109
Just a note that there will be some more enhancements to the edge branch in the near future.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 28 Jun 2019, 04:46
by lexikos
@joedf Yes, there is one comment by joedf. :roll:

I'm not very interested in reviewing pull requests right now or developing Ahk2Exe in general. I considered the possibility of moving Ahk2Exe (preferably @fincs/Ahk2Exe) to github.com/AutoHotkey, but wasn't interested enough to work out the (security) details or follow through. (If a repository is moved, pull requests and issues go with it. Once a repository is moved, GitHub automatically redirects from the old location to the new one, unless the previous owner creates a new repository with the same name.)


I do not intend to release an update for v1 right now, so I think merging the pull request right now wouldn't particularly help anyone.

Is there a pull request for the documentation yet?

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 28 Jun 2019, 09:19
by joedf
@lexikos ... :P

No worries, I see the main AHK repo is always getting bombarded with ... "pull requests and comments" :roll:

The pull request has the updated documentation for the directives, the error codes (possibly moving these into the docs too instead of a separate .md file) have been updated and the overall script has been cleaned up and tested. I think moving the main repository of Ahk2Exe under github.com/AutoHotkey would be best.
Should I contact him and facilitate the move on everyone's behalf?

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 28 Jun 2019, 22:08
by SOTE
ahk7 wrote:
09 Jun 2019, 07:40
Perhaps change the license to GPL so it is the same as AHK? Currently it is WTFPL, it is a bit strange to see (c) Sam H. in there.
The GPL, presently, is a horror and an extremely bad license for open source software. There were fewer options in the past, so people accidentally selected it, often because they didn't know any better or were forced to. The GPL creates problems and confusion with anything licensed under it or associated with it. Not just problems for the software under the license, but for any software or product produced by the license, to include headaches for the author(s) and users. The MIT license (https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT) is vastly superior and corrects many of the flaws associated with the GPL. These days we have much better options.

The only FSF license that still kind of makes sense is the LGPL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License), which at least stops the viral contamination type effect of the GPL on open source software (https://www.zdnet.com/article/preventing-open-source-software-contamination/), so that the software can be of greater usefulness to the public.

The WTFPL is untested in court and is an attempt at putting software into the Public Domain. There are other licenses for that, and the one mostly likely to stand up in court and is accepted by the Free Software Foundation (FSF and who created the GPL), is the Creative Commons license of CC0 (Freeing content globally without restrictions- https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/).

In researching the different licenses, I would argue it's best to use the MIT license that allows for commercial use and eliminates liability, but credit must be given to the author (by always including the copyright notice) or CC0, if the intent is to release the software and resources into the Public Domain without restrictions. Note- The MIT license is compatible with the GPL, as is CC0. Meaning parts of software under GPL can have MIT or CC0 licenses. Though I would argue it's far more convenient to have all of open source software under the MIT or CC0 from the beginning.

Re: Upcoming Ahk2Exe Changes (2019)

Posted: 20 Jul 2019, 01:43
by lexikos
joedf wrote:
28 Jun 2019, 09:19
Should I contact him and facilitate the move on everyone's behalf?
I would suggest asking his opinion. As you might guess by my delayed response and previously stated lack of interest, I have no strong feelings on the matter.