Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Sure but people keep on pissing around with, for example, the | build. You really have no right at all to criticise me when you've | been applying your own experimental patches to the tree. When I see you begin working on bugs that have not been reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but missing features then I reserve the right to comment. I am not aware that I have worked on a lot of non-problems lately. -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
Lars == Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lars John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Sure but people Lars keep on pissing around with, for example, the | build. You Lars really have no right at all to criticise me when you've | been Lars applying your own experimental patches to the tree. Lars When I see you begin working on bugs that have not been Lars reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but Lars missing features then I reserve the right to comment. This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for a lng time. It might even be a bug of mine when I tried to fix another problem with deleteemptyblahblah. JMarc
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:09:38PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Lars When I see you begin working on bugs that have not been Lars reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but Lars missing features then I reserve the right to comment. And then contrast that with you breaking the build for everybody multiple times, and ask yourself honestly which has delayed 1.2 more. It really irks me you (Lars) keep /on/ accusing me of making 1.2 late. This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for a lng time. Either way, of course, I wasn't suggesting it needs to be fixed for 1.2 ... regards john -- Please crack down on the Chinaman's friends and Hitler's commander. Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast. A boy has never wept ... nor dashed a thousand kim. Did you hear me? - Dutch Schultz
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lars == Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Lars John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Sure but people | Lars keep on pissing around with, for example, the | build. You | Lars really have no right at all to criticise me when you've | been | Lars applying your own experimental patches to the tree. | Lars When I see you begin working on bugs that have not been | Lars reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but | Lars missing features then I reserve the right to comment. | This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for | a lng time. It might even be a bug of mine when I tried to fix | another problem with deleteemptyblahblah. At this stage we should not fix stuff that has annoyed people for a long time, not even for a loong time. At this stage we should fix regressions, crashes etc. Not old missing features. -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:09:38PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Lars When I see you begin working on bugs that have not been Lars reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but Lars missing features then I reserve the right to comment. | And then contrast that with you breaking the build for everybody | multiple times, and ask yourself honestly which has delayed 1.2 more. | It really irks me you (Lars) keep /on/ accusing me of making 1.2 late. This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for a lng time. | Either way, of course, I wasn't suggesting it needs to be fixed for 1.2 | ... Then mark it as later in bugzilla. or with a milestone of 1.3.0CVS -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 11:26:00PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | Either way, of course, I wasn't suggesting it needs to be fixed for 1.2 | ... Then mark it as later in bugzilla. or with a milestone of 1.3.0CVS Maybe we've been using bugzilla differently. To me, a bug without a milestone means it's acknowledged as a bug, but does not need to be fixed (and is not aimed for) any particular milestone. So since it lacks a milestone it is implicitly 1.3, or even some later release. The problem with using LATER is that it doesn't show up on an open bugs search (and in fact I believe that's why the Mozilla people don't use it any more at all). regards john -- Please crack down on the Chinaman's friends and Hitler's commander. Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast. A boy has never wept ... nor dashed a thousand kim. Did you hear me? - Dutch Schultz
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
Lars == Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lars At this stage we should not fix stuff that has annoyed people Lars for a long time, not even for a loong time. At this Lars stage we should fix regressions, crashes etc. Not old missing Lars features. Nobody ever suggested we were supposed to fix it right now. We have to fix it eventually, though. JMarc
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Sure but people keep on pissing around with, for example, the | build. You really have no right at all to criticise me when you've | been applying your own experimental patches to the tree. When I see you begin working on "bugs" that have not been reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but missing features then I reserve the right to comment. I am not aware that I have worked on a lot of non-problems lately. -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lars> John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Sure but people Lars> keep on pissing around with, for example, the | build. You Lars> really have no right at all to criticise me when you've | been Lars> applying your own experimental patches to the tree. Lars> When I see you begin working on "bugs" that have not been Lars> reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but Lars> missing features then I reserve the right to comment. This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for a lng time. It might even be a bug of mine when I tried to fix another problem with deleteemptyblahblah. JMarc
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:09:38PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Lars> When I see you begin working on "bugs" that have not been > Lars> reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but > Lars> missing features then I reserve the right to comment. And then contrast that with you breaking the build for everybody multiple times, and ask yourself honestly which has delayed 1.2 more. It really irks me you (Lars) keep /on/ accusing me of making 1.2 late. > This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for > a lng time. Either way, of course, I wasn't suggesting it needs to be fixed for 1.2 ... regards john -- "Please crack down on the Chinaman's friends and Hitler's commander. Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast. A boy has never wept ... nor dashed a thousand kim. Did you hear me?" - Dutch Schultz
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | Lars> John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Sure but people | Lars> keep on pissing around with, for example, the | build. You | Lars> really have no right at all to criticise me when you've | been | Lars> applying your own experimental patches to the tree. > | Lars> When I see you begin working on "bugs" that have not been | Lars> reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but | Lars> missing features then I reserve the right to comment. > | This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for | a lng time. It might even be a bug of mine when I tried to fix | another problem with deleteemptyblahblah. At this stage we should not fix stuff that has "annoyed people for a long time", not even for a loong time. At this stage we should fix regressions, crashes etc. Not old missing features. -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:09:38PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >> Lars> When I see you begin working on "bugs" that have not been >> Lars> reported earlier, even things that are not really bugs, but >> Lars> missing features then I reserve the right to comment. > | And then contrast that with you breaking the build for everybody | multiple times, and ask yourself honestly which has delayed 1.2 more. > | It really irks me you (Lars) keep /on/ accusing me of making 1.2 late. > >> This particuliar problem is IMO a real bug, and has annoyed people for >> a lng time. > | Either way, of course, I wasn't suggesting it needs to be fixed for 1.2 | ... Then mark it as "later" in bugzilla. or with a milestone of 1.3.0CVS -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 11:26:00PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | Either way, of course, I wasn't suggesting it needs to be fixed for 1.2 > | ... > > Then mark it as "later" in bugzilla. > or with a milestone of 1.3.0CVS Maybe we've been using bugzilla differently. To me, a bug without a milestone means it's acknowledged as a bug, but does not need to be fixed (and is not aimed for) any particular milestone. So since it lacks a milestone it is implicitly 1.3, or even some later release. The problem with using LATER is that it doesn't show up on an open bugs search (and in fact I believe that's why the Mozilla people don't use it any more at all). regards john -- "Please crack down on the Chinaman's friends and Hitler's commander. Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast. A boy has never wept ... nor dashed a thousand kim. Did you hear me?" - Dutch Schultz
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lars> At this stage we should not fix stuff that has "annoyed people Lars> for a long time", not even for a loong time. At this Lars> stage we should fix regressions, crashes etc. Not old missing Lars> features. Nobody ever suggested we were supposed to fix it right now. We have to fix it eventually, though. JMarc
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 09:00:33PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?! Why is it a bug? | Because it's stupid and it sucks. From what version do we have this as an regression? | Uhh ? Since when was LyX feature complete exactly ? Document it and call it a feature. | Sure, I'll start lyxdoc/StupidFeatures.lyx ... Only because you don't have the guts to say WONTFIX | bull - look at bugzilla sometime. There are more than 40 open /bugs/ | that aren't nominated. You do realize that we want to release 1.2.0 some time this century? -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 01:37:40PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | bull - look at bugzilla sometime. There are more than 40 open /bugs/ | that aren't nominated. You do realize that we want to release 1.2.0 some time this century? Sure but people keep on pissing around with, for example, the build. You really have no right at all to criticise me when you've been applying your own experimental patches to the tree. Try looking back in ChangeLog for the last six months and see how many of my patches have not been bugfixes. regards john -- Please crack down on the Chinaman's friends and Hitler's commander. Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast. A boy has never wept ... nor dashed a thousand kim. Did you hear me? - Dutch Schultz
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 09:00:33PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> | If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?! >> >> Why is it a bug? > | Because it's stupid and it sucks. > >> From what version do we have this as an regression? > | Uhh ? Since when was LyX feature complete exactly ? > >> Document it and call it a feature. > | Sure, I'll start lyxdoc/StupidFeatures.lyx ... > >> Only because you don't have the guts to say "WONTFIX" > | bull - look at bugzilla sometime. There are more than 40 open /bugs/ | that aren't nominated. You do realize that we want to release 1.2.0 some time this century? -- Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 01:37:40PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | bull - look at bugzilla sometime. There are more than 40 open /bugs/ > | that aren't nominated. > > You do realize that we want to release 1.2.0 some time this century? Sure but people keep on pissing around with, for example, the build. You really have no right at all to criticise me when you've been applying your own experimental patches to the tree. Try looking back in ChangeLog for the last six months and see how many of my patches have not been bugfixes. regards john -- "Please crack down on the Chinaman's friends and Hitler's commander. Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast. A boy has never wept ... nor dashed a thousand kim. Did you hear me?" - Dutch Schultz
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
LyX (at least 1.1.6 [GM]) still won't let you press
return on an empty Section (or whatever), BUT you can edit the text
to be empty, and it will stay there.
I normally write the following paragraph first, then move up and insert
the empty paragraph (e.g. the section) and finally move down again (as
the cursor keys work) to continue writing. Still, a fix to this unwanted
behaviour is on top of my personal lyx wishlist.
| If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?!
Why is it a bug? From what version do we have this as an regression?
Document it and call it a feature.
| Anyway I've had a very quick look at this. The first part is easy, in
| text.C:breakParagraph()
|1704 // if we don't keep empty text, don't allow a break
|1705 if (!layout.keepempty par-size() 1
|1706 layout.labeltype != LABEL_SENSITIVE) {
|1707 return;
|1708 }
| Now the behaviour is that when you press return on a keepempty section,
| for example, the new par is inserted /above/ the section. The code is
| kind of hard to follow around this area: any hints anybody ?
| Guenter - open a bug on bugzilla.lyx.org :)
| regards
| john
| p.s. I've noticed we missed the nadir point of releasing pre1 and the
| bugs are growing again :(
Only because you don't have the guts to say WONTFIX
--
Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > LyX (at least 1.1.6 [GM]) still won't let you press
>> > "return" on an empty Section (or whatever), BUT you can edit the text
>> > to be empty, and it will stay there.
>>
>> I normally write the following paragraph first, then move up and insert
>> the empty paragraph (e.g. the section) and finally move down again (as
>> the cursor keys work) to continue writing. Still, a fix to this unwanted
>> behaviour is on top of my personal lyx wishlist.
>
| If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?!
Why is it a bug? From what version do we have this as an regression?
Document it and call it a feature.
| Anyway I've had a very quick look at this. The first part is easy, in
| text.C:breakParagraph()
>
|1704 // if we don't keep empty text, don't allow a break
|1705 if (!layout.keepempty && par->size() < 1
|1706 && layout.labeltype != LABEL_SENSITIVE) {
|1707 return;
|1708 }
>
| Now the behaviour is that when you press return on a keepempty section,
| for example, the new par is inserted /above/ the section. The code is
| kind of hard to follow around this area: any hints anybody ?
>
| Guenter - open a bug on bugzilla.lyx.org :)
>
| regards
| john
>
| p.s. I've noticed we missed the nadir point of releasing pre1 and the
| bugs are growing again :(
Only because you don't have the guts to say "WONTFIX"
--
Lgb
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Thu, 28 Mar 2002 02:04:18 + wrote John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?! Becouse I am lazy (and did not have access when I recovered this one). However, now I did: http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=313 Guenter -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
On Thu, 28 Mar 2002 02:04:18 + wrote John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?! Becouse I am lazy (and did not have access when I recovered this one). However, now I did: http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=313 Guenter -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
LyX (at least 1.1.6 [GM]) still won't let you press
return on an empty Section (or whatever), BUT you can edit the text
to be empty, and it will stay there.
I normally write the following paragraph first, then move up and insert
the empty paragraph (e.g. the section) and finally move down again (as
the cursor keys work) to continue writing. Still, a fix to this unwanted
behaviour is on top of my personal lyx wishlist.
If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?!
Anyway I've had a very quick look at this. The first part is easy, in
text.C:breakParagraph()
1704 // if we don't keep empty text, don't allow a break
1705 if (!layout.keepempty par-size() 1
1706 layout.labeltype != LABEL_SENSITIVE) {
1707 return;
1708 }
Now the behaviour is that when you press return on a keepempty section,
for example, the new par is inserted /above/ the section. The code is
kind of hard to follow around this area: any hints anybody ?
Guenter - open a bug on bugzilla.lyx.org :)
regards
john
p.s. I've noticed we missed the nadir point of releasing pre1 and the
bugs are growing again :(
--
To the untrained eye it might seem as though Quality programs and ISO 9000 are
not related. I was confused too until one consultant explained it to me this
way : 'ISO 9000 is closely related to Quality because everything you do is
Quality and ISO 9000 documents everything you do, therefore give us money.'
- Scott Adams
Breaking paragraph in a keepempty Section
> > LyX (at least 1.1.6 [GM]) still won't let you press
> > "return" on an empty Section (or whatever), BUT you can edit the text
> > to be empty, and it will stay there.
>
> I normally write the following paragraph first, then move up and insert
> the empty paragraph (e.g. the section) and finally move down again (as
> the cursor keys work) to continue writing. Still, a fix to this unwanted
> behaviour is on top of my personal lyx wishlist.
If this is the case why on earth didn't you open a bug ?!
Anyway I've had a very quick look at this. The first part is easy, in
text.C:breakParagraph()
1704 // if we don't keep empty text, don't allow a break
1705 if (!layout.keepempty && par->size() < 1
1706 && layout.labeltype != LABEL_SENSITIVE) {
1707 return;
1708 }
Now the behaviour is that when you press return on a keepempty section,
for example, the new par is inserted /above/ the section. The code is
kind of hard to follow around this area: any hints anybody ?
Guenter - open a bug on bugzilla.lyx.org :)
regards
john
p.s. I've noticed we missed the nadir point of releasing pre1 and the
bugs are growing again :(
--
"To the untrained eye it might seem as though Quality programs and ISO 9000 are
not related. I was confused too until one consultant explained it to me this
way : 'ISO 9000 is closely related to Quality because everything you do is
Quality and ISO 9000 documents everything you do, therefore give us money.'"
- Scott Adams
