Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On 02/14/2018 09:34 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 13/02/2018 à 07:53, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit : >> Am Dienstag, den 13.02.2018, 01:54 +0100 schrieb Uwe Stöhr: >>> In my opinion a major version should contain all major bugfixes. Here >>> we >>> have a menu entry for a feature that doesn't

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 13/02/2018 à 07:53, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit : Am Dienstag, den 13.02.2018, 01:54 +0100 schrieb Uwe Stöhr: In my opinion a major version should contain all major bugfixes. Here we have a menu entry for a feature that doesn't work. This is no good advertisement for LyX. We have a working

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 13/02/2018 à 21:30, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 01:14:43PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Scott, do you want to wait for a nod from the windows side or can I apply the patch now ? Please go ahead now. Thanks for the patch. Done. Someone might want to remove the

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 01:14:43PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Scott, do you want to wait for a nod from the windows side or can I apply > the patch now ? Please go ahead now. Thanks for the patch. Scott signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [PATCH] Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 05:45:19PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 12/02/2018 à 17:41, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > Why do you leave in the following code? > > > > #if defined(Q_WS_X11) || defined(QPA_XCB) > > pixmapCacheCB->setEnabled(false); > > #endif > > > > I'm

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 13/02/2018 à 01:56, Joel Kulesza a écrit : JMarc, I applied your patch to master@5f1b32f8c (note: it didn't apply cleanly, see below my signature).  Regardless, it hid the checkbox and associated label properly and the LyX interface behaved as though the setting is disabled (i.e., math

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Am Dienstag, den 13.02.2018, 01:54 +0100 schrieb Uwe Stöhr: > In my opinion a major version should contain all major bugfixes. Here > we > have a menu entry for a feature that doesn't work. This is no good > advertisement for LyX. > We have a working fix that is well tested on Windows. If we

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On 02/12/2018 07:54 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 13.02.2018 um 00:19 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: >>> https://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/9139 >> >> I don't see the advantage of doing this at a major version. Even if >> there is an advantage, I don't think that so soon before the final >> release is the

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:20 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 10/02/2018 à 20:28, Joel Kulesza a écrit : > >> The only comment I have is that a crash may be causable if the preference >> is ignored rather than disabled (see https://www.mail-archive.com/l >>

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Am 13.02.2018 um 00:19 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: I agree that the 2.3. branch is stable I used it recently for a larger document. The strange, random Win-only crash is annoying but we cannot do much right now. Just to make sure, the crash you're talking about also exists for 2.2.x, right?

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 06:00:52PM +, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 10.02.2018 um 19:51 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > > > I'm planning to be more strict now on which bug fixes go in for 2.3.0. I > > might prefer that even a simple bug fix not be committed, unless it > > fixes an important bug. > >

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Am 10.02.2018 um 19:51 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: I'm planning to be more strict now on which bug fixes go in for 2.3.0. I might prefer that even a simple bug fix not be committed, unless it fixes an important bug. Hello Scott, I agree that the 2.3. branch is stable I used it recently for a

Re: [PATCH] Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:18:16AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > This seems simple enough, but of course should be checked by Mac/Win people. +1 > I also removed traces of it in the English User's Guide, and added some > entries in release notes. Feel free to improve on the wording.

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:24:53AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I propose to keep the faulty superscript for now and take some time to > determine a satisfactory solution. Fine with me. I'll update the main thread on this issue, and take this off my 2.3.0 list unless there is

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 12/02/2018 ?? 17:14, Pavel Sanda a écrit : >> I do not think that any package maintainer in his senses will ever push 2.3 >> directly to testing when issues like this are involved :) > > You mean that they are more careful than us ? > > But this patch was not ours,

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 12/02/2018 à 17:14, Pavel Sanda a écrit : I quickly checked whether we know the current maintainer from the list and this log showed as one of the changes between 2.2.3-5 x 2.2.3-5: ... Revert "Use Python 3 instead of 2", introduced in 2.2.3-3. The support of Python 3 is still too fragile and

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 12/02/2018 ?? 16:23, Pavel Sanda a écrit : >> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>> Another data point: to have a chance to get LyX 2.3.0 in ubuntu 18/04 LTS, >>> we will need it to be in debian before March 1st. I do not know how quick >>> the debian maintainers will be

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 12/02/2018 à 16:23, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Another data point: to have a chance to get LyX 2.3.0 in ubuntu 18/04 LTS, we will need it to be in debian before March 1st. I do not know how quick the debian maintainers will be to package 2.3.0 there (they have a life

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Another data point: to have a chance to get LyX 2.3.0 in ubuntu 18/04 LTS, > we will need it to be in debian before March 1st. I do not know how quick > the debian maintainers will be to package 2.3.0 there (they have a life too > ;), so it is our interest to get

Re: [PATCH] Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 12/02/2018 à 11:18, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 10/02/2018 à 22:24, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : I can propose something simple on Monday: remove from GUI (like we do in Linux) and always act as if the pref is off. Here is what I had in mind. I discovered that the checkbox was not

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 10/02/2018 à 23:49, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : The only other regression to my knowledge that is pending is a minor issue in LyX's painting: https://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=mid=20180210042849.k6trww2rmruj4jrq%40steph There is a patch pending, and we just need to decide what is

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 10/02/2018 à 20:28, Joel Kulesza a écrit : The only comment I have is that a crash may be causable if the preference is ignored rather than disabled (see https://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg203649.html). Disabling the checkbox removes the ability to reproduce.

[PATCH] Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 10/02/2018 à 22:24, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : I can propose something simple on Monday: remove from GUI (like we do in Linux) and always act as if the pref is off. Here is what I had in mind. I discovered that the checkbox was not hidden but disabled on Linux. I added code to hide it

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Saturday, 10 February 2018 18.51.44 WET Scott Kostyshak wrote: > What is your feeling on how stable our 2.3.x branch currently is? I have > the feeling that it is quite stable and that we should now make plans > for the next step in the release process. I propose to make the final > 2.3.0

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On 02/10/2018 01:51 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > What is your feeling on how stable our 2.3.x branch currently is? I have the > feeling that it is quite stable and that we should now make plans for the > next step in the release process. I propose to make the final 2.3.0 release > in about two

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 09:24:52PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 10/02/2018 à 19:51, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > One pending issue is that we appear to have broken the pixmap cache > > (compared to 2.2.3). We are considering not fixing it and instead > > ignoring the preference since

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Le 10/02/2018 à 19:51, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : One pending issue is that we appear to have broken the pixmap cache (compared to 2.2.3). We are considering not fixing it and instead ignoring the preference since we have no reason to believe that the preference is useful anymore. This late in

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 07:28:01PM +, Joel Kulesza wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > One pending issue is that we appear to have broken the pixmap cache > > (compared to 2.2.3). We are considering not fixing it and instead > > ignoring

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > One pending issue is that we appear to have broken the pixmap cache > (compared to 2.2.3). We are considering not fixing it and instead > ignoring the preference since we have no reason to believe that the > preference

Re: Plan for final steps of 2.3.0 release

Am Samstag, den 10.02.2018, 13:51 -0500 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > Am I missing any other potential blocker? I'm not aware of any. > What is your feeling on how stable our 2.3.x branch currently is? I think it is stable enough to be released. I use it for daily work for quite some time now,