On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 15:41:17 +0200 Roberto <foice.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/08/2017 17:35, Cris Fuhrman wrote: > > I support abstracting file details because it makes using LyX > > easier, but at the same time I would not like to give up control > > over the modular aspects, such as the custom converters, which I > > think is a big strength in LyX design. For example, being able to > > update all my article's figures generated from an R script and not > > have to change anything in the LyX file is a huge convenience! > > I guess you can decide when you add a new graphics if LyX has to > "ingest" it or leave it where it is, just an option for that graphics. Are you ever going to let this thread die? You've aleady found that as many people are against it as for it. You've been informed it will break existing things (and then you argued about that). You've been presented with the perfectly good alternative of zipping or tarballing your document directory, and you found things you didn't like about that. Here's why what you want will never get built: * Developer time is very valuable, with lots of competing improvements. * Your idea is somewhere between unpopular and lukewarm popular. * Nobody actually committed to writing the code. * You never offered to help write the code. If you value your credibility, your best move now is to let this thread die. SteveT
