On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 09:35:43PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 16/07/2017 à 21:24, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : > > On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 09:04:11PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > > > I do not think that minted in itself is relevant here. My point is that > > > shell-escape should be treated in the needauth framework. > > > > This is also my point. I will not accept anything that is valid only > > for minted. If minted support has to be removed, then also support > > for needauth and dangerous converters has to be removed. > > Agreed. OTOH, I do not want to have support for minted that require to > hardcode stuff outside of the Listings inset.
This is a false problem. For me, minted support could stay as it is now. Who needs it can read the fine manual and take all the necessary actions to exploit the support offered by LyX. As it stands now, minted support is not dangerous at all. > > Note that I didn't need this support and was actually encouraged to > > add it, giving someone the opportunity to lay an ambush. So, this is > > mostly a matter of principle, AFAIC. > > Enrico, in general I try not to disagree with you, not because I am scared > of retaliation (but of course, you scare me to some extent :), Funny, I could use the same argument :) > but because usually when I think that you are wrong it means that I should > think more about the problem. I think I am a reasonable person that tries to not stand in the way. However, I am not incline at turning the other cheek. > However in this case, I think that taking things > personally does not help anyone. I can see there is this electric thing > between Guillaume and you, but what I do not really understand is why this > happens. Maybe we have a charge with the same sign. > This probably means that we should have a developers' meeting soon and that > you should both attend. You started on the wrong foot. I don't know why, but I think that comments like this are not going to help either. -- Enrico
