I much prefer the 2.0 editor over the 3.0 editor.

I feel like there should be a way to download the 2.0 file of the project (if it was originally made in 2.0) so someone can edit it in the offline editor. There’s actually several reasons why this would be necessary.

There’s a website you can use to convert scratch files into a file that can be posted to DeviantArt. However, I’m pretty sure it only works on 2.0 files at this point, though they might update it later.

The 3.0 editor is very confusing (at least in my opinion as well as several others) and a lot of people prefer the older one. So if someone could download the sb2 version of the project then they could edit it in the older editor which they understand more.




Sorry if I’m not explaining this right.

You could use this sb3 to sb2 converter - https://scratch-mit-edu.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/discuss/topic/341046/

Flipped_ wrote:

You could use this sb3 to sb2 converter - https://scratch-mit-edu.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/discuss/topic/341046/

Makes sense, though some people don’t trust third party software.
It should probably be a built in feature, at least if it isn’t too hard to make.

M1mikyu wrote:

Makes sense, though some people don’t trust third party software.
It should probably be a built in feature, at least if it isn’t too hard to make.

This converter is as good as an official converter, or at least should be, in terms of trustworthiness. If the converter downloaded any malware, the ST would probably notice pretty quickly and take action.

Flipped_ wrote:

M1mikyu wrote:

Makes sense, though some people don’t trust third party software.
It should probably be a built in feature, at least if it isn’t too hard to make.

This converter is as good as an official converter, or at least should be, in terms of trustworthiness. If the converter downloaded any malware, the ST would probably notice pretty quickly and take action.

Still, I'm pretty sure that lots of people won't trust it. Also you need Python to use it and I'm not sure if everyone has Python.
Also I personally don't trust it.

M1mikyu wrote:

Still, I'm pretty sure that lots of people won't trust it. Also you need Python to use it and I'm not sure if everyone has Python.
Also I personally don't trust it.

Hmm, I guess, but what would the built-in converter do with new 3.0 blocks? -Rex-'s converter just makes them undefined custom blocks (which isn't a good way of handling them, they could be made hacked blocks).

Flipped_ wrote:

M1mikyu wrote:

Still, I'm pretty sure that lots of people won't trust it. Also you need Python to use it and I'm not sure if everyone has Python.
Also I personally don't trust it.

Hmm, I guess, but what would the built-in converter do with new 3.0 blocks? -Rex-'s converter just makes them undefined custom blocks (which isn't a good way of handling them, they could be made hacked blocks).

Make projects with them be unable to be converted,
I’m mainly suggesting for projects made in 2.0

If you haven't yet saved a project in 3.0, you can open it in 2.0 and download it with s2online (full disclaimer: I made it ). It's easier to trust and use than sb3tosb2 because it runs in your browser, only depending on Flash, and is based on the code of a long-standing project backup tool made by another community member. That said, it's definitely different from sb3tosb2 because it only creates an archive of an existing, original SB2 file; it can't create an SB2 from an SB3 (which is what your project is saved as, if you have modified it in 3.0).

An official tool for retrieving old 2.0 versions of projects would certainly be nice, but I think the Scratch Team is probably more prioritized on improving the future of Scratch, rather than supporting old versions. So for things like converting SB3s to SB2s or backing up SB2s, where all the resources are available to (write code to) do it ourselves, it makes sense for the Scratch community to take up projects like this.

Flipped_ wrote:

M1mikyu wrote:

Still, I'm pretty sure that lots of people won't trust it. Also you need Python to use it and I'm not sure if everyone has Python.
Also I personally don't trust it.

Hmm, I guess, but what would the built-in converter do with new 3.0 blocks? -Rex-'s converter just makes them undefined custom blocks (which isn't a good way of handling them, they could be made hacked blocks).

Trust me, I've tried to convert

[] contains []? :: operators boolean

and

item # of [] in [ v] :: list reporter

into hacked blocks, but I haven't found a way to convert them without making them stack blocks because it seems that Scratch 2.0 caches variables (or something similar) before evaluating reporters. That being said, it certainly should be possible and

costume [name v] :: looks reporter

and

set drag mode [draggable v] :: sensing stack

shouldn't be all that difficult to convert.

-Rex- wrote:

Trust me, I've tried to convert

[] contains []? :: operators boolean

and

item # of [] in [ v] :: list reporter

into hacked blocks, but I haven't found a way to convert them without making them stack blocks because it seems that Scratch 2.0 caches variables (or something similar) before evaluating reporters. That being said, it certainly should be possible and

costume [name v]

and

set drag mode [draggable v]

shouldn't be all that difficult to convert.

Oh okay.

Flipped_ wrote:

-Rex- wrote:

Trust me, I've tried to convert

[] contains []? :: operators boolean

and

item # of [] in [ v] :: list reporter

into hacked blocks, but I haven't found a way to convert them without making them stack blocks because it seems that Scratch 2.0 caches variables (or something similar) before evaluating reporters. That being said, it certainly should be possible and

costume [name v]

and

set drag mode [draggable v]

shouldn't be all that difficult to convert.

Oh okay.

(Sorry if this isn't relevant to the suggestion)
I've added workaround support for

costume [name v] :: looks reporter

and

set drag mode [ v] :: sensing stack

to my converter, but it requires all variables, lists, and custom blocks to have an underscore added in front of their name.

Should this be moved to the Advanced Topic section, because the posts look advanced for normal Scratchers? I can understand, but others may not.

Also, no support, there are converters online. If you don't want to use it, you don't have to.

Epic_TV wrote:

Should this be moved to the Advanced Topic section, because the posts look advanced for normal Scratchers? I can understand, but others may not.

No, this fits in the Suggestions forum because the user is making a suggestion on how to improve Scratch. The OP's post is not at all difficult to understand — it's simply asking for a way to download projects as a .sb2 file rather than a .sb3 file (unless I'm mistaken).

Epic_TV wrote:

Also, no support, there are converters online. If you don't want to use it, you don't have to.

But the suggestion is asking for a Scratch-official way to convert projects (unless I'm mistaken). This is like saying “no support” to a block that has a workaround, and you don't have to use the workaround if you don't want to.

In fact, if people don't want to use some random online converter, shouldn't that make it all the more reason to support this suggestion? If users only trust Scratch, then the “there are other online converters” argument is no good here.

Za-Chary wrote:

Epic_TV wrote:

Should this be moved to the Advanced Topic section, because the posts look advanced for normal Scratchers? I can understand, but others may not.

No, this fits in the Suggestions forum because the user is making a suggestion on how to improve Scratch. The OP's post is not at all difficult to understand — it's simply asking for a way to download projects as a .sb2 file rather than a .sb3 file (unless I'm mistaken).

Epic_TV wrote:

Also, no support, there are converters online. If you don't want to use it, you don't have to.

But the suggestion is asking for a Scratch-official way to convert projects (unless I'm mistaken). This is like saying “no support” to a block that has a workaround, and you don't have to use the workaround if you don't want to.

In fact, if people don't want to use some random online converter, shouldn't that make it all the more reason to support this suggestion? If users only trust Scratch, then the “there are other online converters” argument is no good here.

Yeah that's what I meant!
I don't really generally trust downloading things from users that I don't know/trust, so I'd much rather it be an official on-site feature.
And how is the OP confusing?

Well, even if the feature was implemented, Flash is dying next year, so you would only have it for less than a year.


Maybe make a 2.0 project downloader in HTML?

Semi-Support.

Epic_TV wrote:

Well, even if the feature was implemented, Flash is dying next year, so you would only have it for less than a year.


Maybe make a 2.0 project downloader in HTML?

Semi-Support.

I think the 2.0 offline editor will last a little longer than that. If I remember correctly, it uses Adobe Air, not Flash.

bump

Bump

In Scratch 1.4 to 2.0, there was a way you could download the .sb project from the embed menu. In Scratch 3.0, there is no embed menu, but maybe if you click file in the editor on a 2.0 project, there could be a “Download 2.0 project” option which would download the .sb2 project. (Or maybe they'll add back the embed menu eventually and that will contain an option to download the .sb2 file.)

Bump