FilePro License Manager

[Henry Melancon]

Richard please quit shooting yourself in the foot!

"I only had to make a minor change in that file to point at the
proper license."

And is this documented anywhere?  And how would I know if this needs to be done?
There always seems to be something that needs to be done "manually" to make things work.
This is an inconvenience to most users who are not "experts". 
Modern programs do all this tweaking automatically.  I do not have the time or the patience for tweaking...
 
Henry W. Melancon
Quality Control
Gulf Island Fabrication

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Kreiss [mailto:rkreiss at verizon.net] 
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 2:36 PM
To: Henry Melancon <hemelancon at gifinc.com>; filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
Subject: RE: FilePro License Manager



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Filepro-list [mailto:filepro-list-
> bounces+rkreiss=verizon.net at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf Of Henry
Melancon
> via Filepro-list
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 5:32 PM
> To: Filepro 2 List <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
> Subject: RE: FilePro License Manager
> 
> LICENSEs = PROBLEMS I do not want OR have the time to deal with......

5.0.15 required licensing.

As I have said many times, I and my clients are not having any issues with
the license manager.

When one of my clients installed a new server and upgraded to 5.8, a new
license was issued quickly.  There was no hassle to install the new version
and get the service running.  As the startup file points to the address of
the server, I only had to make a minor change in that file to point at the
proper license. 


Richard Kreiss
GCC Consulting



> 
> THE END
> 
> Henry W. Melancon
> Quality Control
> Gulf Island Fabrication
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Filepro-list [mailto:filepro-list-
> bounces+hemelancon=gifinc.com at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf Of Fairlight
via
> Filepro-list
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 4:23 PM
> To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: Re: FilePro License Manager
> 
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 04:12:53PM -0400, Timothy R Barr via Filepro-list
thus
> spoke:
> > Mark,
> >
> > We all know your POV on this, but please don't call me a liar.
> [snip]
> > you're big on facts
> 
> 1) FACT - You said:
> 
> > > Yes, disconnected remote desktop sessions can eat some licenses.
> 
> That -is- a problem.  That -does- get in your way if you do not address
it.
> 
> 2) FACT - You said:
> 
> > > But we have a nightly.bat file that restarts the license manager, GI
> > > server, clears open share sessions, and then runs other nightly
> > > exports and processes.
> 
> You publicly admit you are addressing a problem.
> 
> 3) FACT - You said:
> 
> > I choose to run such a housekeeping script nightly before my backups,
> > as it guarantees that even users who are connected but didn't log off
> > are cleared.  My choice, and I need it to clean up Windows (or Unix)
> > sessions as much as to make sure I'm not wasting any FP licenses.  In
> > client sites
> 
> You further admit and expound upon the fact that you are addressing the
> problem, in order to guarantee mitigation of said problem.
> 
> 4) FACT - You said:
> 
> > > Bottom line, The license manager does not get in my way.
> 
> You made a blatantly untrue statement.  The license manager -does- get in
your
> way, if you had to go out of your way to guarantee performance which the
> license manager should inherently guarantee on its own.  Choice or not
(sure,
> you -could- let it screw you over randomly), it obviously -did- get in
your way
> enough to trouble you to -make- the choice to address it.
> 
> 5) QUESTION:  What do -you- call someone who intentionally and knowingly
> makes untrue statements in favour of their own point of view, contrary to
the
> facts?
> 
> If you don't like the assertion, don't invite it by exhibiting the
behaviour the
> assertion describes.  QED.
> 
> In point of FACT, I didn't explicitly call you a liar.  I said your
statement was a lie.
> The statement -is- demonstrably a lie, but I did not go for a personal
attack.  You
> inferred one, but that's your problem, since I never said it directly.  I
was
> addressing the statement alone, not your character.  However, if you want
to
> turn it into something it wasn't, well then I've just shown you that you
have no
> leg to stand on for that argument either.
> 
> NEXT!
> 
> mark->
> --
> Audio panton, cogito singularis.
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.c
> elestial.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffilepro-
> list&data=01%7C01%7Chemelancon%40gifinc.com%7Ca214c7ddd3e54a0e214f
> 08d4e4ed1948%7Ca3e66affd7674dabad3755c96bce6af7%7C0&sdata=WWCW3
> hJtA1SKhhXdMbjKGhJ7KOVq8K4aHVs7hQzIy7w%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.celestial.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffilepro-list&data=01%7C01%7Chemelancon%40gifinc.com%7C8f1f324c851e4f5e041608d4e5a725f9%7Ca3e66affd7674dabad3755c96bce6af7%7C0&sdata=h%2FRbEGfGj0Azl1CFXxjc%2B6Q4AXvs%2F%2FjrYjQiOnzPXwk%3D&reserved=0