Re: Who!
On 12 Jan 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: ...wants to do the announcement for LyX 1.1.6? and don't forget to update the web site... go get at ftp.lyx.org or ftp.devel.lyx.org Argh! It's looks like my doc CVS updates were about an hour late. Sigh. Intro and the UG should be up to date with 1.1.6, the "pre's" at least. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Stupid cucumber in 1.1.6 splash screen
Hi guys, I noticed the cucumber escaped from CVS into the 1.1.6 distribution. It's okay for CVS, but doesn't exactly convey the supposed seriousness of the development effort. Please kill it. (No smileys.) Now back to more late documentation ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Another book written using LyX
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001, Alejandro Aguilar Sierra wrote: Did anybody know about this book on postgresql? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/awbook.html IMHO the link should be somewhere in the users site, in a section "Who uses LyX". There should be also some other success stories that have been sent to this list, like Garst's ones. Ahem. It's in the FAQ - Section 1.2 "That's fine, but is it useful?". It's time to get the @#$% FAQ on the web page. Anyone want to make a whizzy thing to update an HTML page automatically when I update the LyX file in CVS? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Old docs in 1.1.6
I was about to tell someone in the User's list to RTFM, when I found that the docs in 1.1.6 are ancient (at least two weeks old :-). Lars, did you forget to update them before you created 1.1.6? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Old docs in 1.1.6 - Never Mind.
On 17 Jan 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | I was about to tell someone in the User's list to RTFM, when I found that | the docs in 1.1.6 are ancient (at least two weeks old :-). Lars, did you | forget to update them before you created 1.1.6? Or have you been commiting to the wrong branch? When I "make dist" the documentation is automatically gotten from cvs. Never mind - I must have had a bad "make install" so that some old version of LyX wasn't completely overwritten. I just reran the make again, and everything is now fine. I can now tell people to RTFM again in good conscience :-). Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Another book written using LyX
On 18 Jan 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: "Mike" == [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mike Ahem. It's in the FAQ - Section 1.2 "That's fine, but is it Mike useful?". It's time to get the @#$% FAQ on the web page. Anyone Mike want to make a whizzy thing to update an HTML page automatically Mike when I update the LyX file in CVS? You mean here? http://www.sad.it/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/FAQ/node2.html#SECTION00022000 Yes, I know that exists (and I'm glad it does), but there should be a pointer on the www.lyx.org front page that points to an autogenerated FAQ.html derived from the lyxdoc CVS. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: deleting one line from multiline equation
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Tuukka Toivonen wrote: This feels like simple question but I cannot find answer from LyX documents. How can I delete one line from multiline math equation? User Guide says M-e k but it doesn't work with 1.1.6. I couldn't find the command from reference manual. I noticed this on while working on the new keybindings for Reference.lyx, so I have forwarded this message to the developer list. Devvies, any comment? Mike - your humble documentation guy ... -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Repeated request to change Figure to Graphic
Hi guys (and girls, if there are any reading), Since you are munging the user layout and file formats right now, I would like to repeat my request of a few months ago to change the name of Insert-Figure to Insert-Graphic. The reasons are several: 1) A "figure" as defined by LaTeX does not require an EPS file. It is simply a floating "thing". 2) LyX's current definition of "figure float" fits the more commonly accepted English definition of a "figure". 3) With the new effort to handle non-EPS graphical formats, "figure" is even more of a misnomer. "Graphic", "picture", or "image" would all be more acceptable. I would propose changing Insert-Figure to Insert-Graphic Insert-Tabular to Insert-Tabular Material Insert-Floats-Figure Float to Insert-Floats-Figure Insert-Floats-Table Float to Insert-Floats-Table Insert-Floats-Wide Figure Float to Insert-Floats-Wide Figure Insert-Floats-Wide Table Float to Insert-Floats-Wide Table Insert-Floats-Algorithm Float to Insert-Floats-Algorithm Please change this. I know it's only a trivial user interface issue, but it's a blaringly obvious one. I'd like to move us from LaTeXese to English. Mike P.S. And I'd be happy to change the documentation accordingly :-) -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Repeated request to change Figure to Graphic
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please change this. I know it's only a trivial user interface issue, but it's a blaringly obvious one. I'd like to move us from LaTeXese to English. And yes, I mean for 1.1.6fix1! Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Repeated request to change Figure to Graphic
On 24 Jan 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Since you are munging the user layout and file formats right now, I would | like to repeat my request of a few months ago to change the name of | Insert-Figure to Insert-Graphic. The reasons are several: I agree with this change, but not quite sure about 1.1.6fix1. Okay, fix2 :-) The important thing is that I do not want to see it forgotten again, and it's important enough that I think it should be done "soon". The impact to the code should be low, but of course, nothing is ever as simple as it appears ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Repeated request to change Figure to Graphic
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Garst R. Reese wrote: I agree completely with this. The current terminology is gobbledegook if you are not a latex guru. And I second the motion to do it for fix1. Even with Mike's excellent suggestions, but why not just Insert-Table for Insert-Tabular. The word tabular implies to me things like lists as well as tables, but when I click on Insert-Tabular, I get the table layout box. This is a sticky one, and I haven't come up with a really good one yet. My "Tabular Material" suggestion was to indicate that this is where the table "box" comes from, while "Table" was the thing which floats around and includes a title/caption and is where you stick a "Tabular Material". If anyone has a better nomenclature for this, please suggest it. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: patch for default.ui
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, R. Lahaye wrote: 1) I renamed the 'Insert-Graphics' entry into 'Figure' (as it was before). Although there is (will be?) a new graphics inset, I suggest to stick to call it "Figure", to stay closer to LaTeX terminology. NOO! I know Lars already responded, but I want to yell again. I suggested renaiming this to "graphic" precisely because 1) we need to get away from LaTeXisms, and 2) this isn't even how LaTeX uses it. A LaTeX figure is what we currently call a "figure float". That's really bad, and I suggested calling it simply "figure", since that is what the rest of the world would call it. What LyX called a figure, LaTeX loads with includegraphics, and is what the rest of the (English speaking) world would call a graphic, image, picture, etc., but not "figure". I'm willing to accept the existing terminology for 1.1.6fix?, but it should be changed by 1.2.0. Back to my cave ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: New feature: Bookmarks in LyX?
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos wrote: On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:42:31PM +0900, R. Lahaye wrote: Well, if "Figures" are called "Graphics", then my change my be of no good. But then "Insert-Floats-Figure" and "Insert-Floats-Wide Figure" should be renamed to "Graphics" and "Wide Graphics". Don't you think? No! I don't have any formed opinion for this. But at least it look coherent. :-) No wonder I didn't see many responses to your original article - the Subject changed. I beg you to look in the lyx-devel archives for my original renaming proposal. I actually did think about this for more than a few microseconds, and there was a method to my renaming madness. There are very specific definitions of the things we currently (incorrectly) call figures, figure floats, etc. Please find the original thread. (Search on Insert-Graphic.) Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Math mode (sort of) bug
In the old days, if I typed "M-m g m m" I would get the greek letter mu followed by an m - the usual symbol for micrometer (or micron). With 1.1.6fix1, if I type this sequence, the mu is created, but the cursor stays at the front edge of the math box, so that the m is then placed in front of the mu, instead of after it. Not a devastating bug, but an annoying one, since infrared astronomy is full of microns ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Bug in float fig captions
Hi, The figure caption in a float appears to be immune to justification commands: setting left, right, center, or block has no effect. And worse, the state it is in is "center", which is probably the worst of the 4 possibilities (well, maybe right would be worse). Reopening Layout-Paragraph always shows the radio button at "center", no matter what you did before. The perverse thing is that the DVI always shows the caption as "block", as it should. This is 1.1.6fix1. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: 1.1.6fix1 stability?
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Juergen Vigna wrote:
On 15-Feb-2001 Michael Schmitt wrote:
However, it is my impression that 1.1.6 has been released a bit too early
Well the problem is that we wouldn't have found all the problems with
the tabulars so fast if we wouldn't have released it to public, only
few people try cvs-versions HARD :)
\begin{no_smiley_day}
We are not Micro$oft - there is no excuse for using normal users as bug
finders. I actually threw out 1.1.6fix1 and reverted back to 1.1.5fix2;
and I supposedly know what I'm doing. The tabular bugs, the greek letter
math bug, etc. were just too much, and so I nuked it. The sad thing is, I
was trying to convince a colleague that LyX was such a wonderful tool. She
tried 1.1.6fix1 on an instrument manual that I had written, but got so
frustrated that she swore it off and asked for a LaTeX dump to work on
instead. This is not the way to win new users.
I'm not criticizing all the wonderful work you all are doing. I really do
like what I see in 1.1.6 and am looking forward to the new things in 1.2
and beyond, and I'll still be here to help document them. But 1.1.6 (and
fix1) should never have been released as a public, "stable" version,
particularly since it was known that the tabular code wasn't complete.
\end{no_smiley_day}
I've been trying to figure out a polite way to say this for some time.
Juergen just pushed me over the edge :-)
Mike
--
Mike Ressler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: 1.1.6fix1 stability?
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Juergen Vigna wrote: On 16-Feb-2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been trying to figure out a polite way to say this for some time. Juergen just pushed me over the edge :-) Well you shouldn't have put that smily there on a friday, you're a heretic! ;) Jürgen (who still thinks we did the right choice) Only a little heretical :-) I wanted to show a little annoyance without being completely rude about it. I know you want a lot of people to test such things; I just wish another pre or two had been released first (but then that would have annoyed Lars :-) So not every one can be completely happy. I still think there needs to be some way of warning people about the stability of the release without surprising them. I now refuse to upgrade from 1.1.5fix2 for real work until I'm sure the new release is just as stable. I can't afford to get caught again with a not-quite-complete version of LyX the day a conference proceeding paper is due (which happened to me with 1.1.6). Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: another patch...
On 5 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: I tried the "benchmark" a bit here, and the times in successive rune fluctuate enough that I do not see how you can interpret them... This wins the "Cool Typo" award. When reading your (the developers') discussions of compilers, pragmas, etc. my head spins enough that you may as well be benchmarking in "successive runes", because I am certain that you are practicing spells and engaged in the black arts. Maybe it's time to support Peter Wilson's excellent archaic fonts, e.g. ctan:/tex-archive/fonts/archaic/runic. :-) Happy Monday! Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Menu Separator aka lyxarrow
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, John Levon wrote: Why do we have this ? It seems a bit ad hoc. Is it just for the convenience of the doc writers or something ? Put on your asbestos suit! John Weiss is going to hunt you down and smack you with his small fish :-) (Find a message from him and look at his signature.) We had a big row about this a couple of years ago when we discussed the proper format for the "arrow" to be used in the documentation for things like File-Open. I don't remember exactly how we settled on that particular rotated triangle, but it was deemed Holy and Pure, and thus became policy. While it is certainly crucial for the LyX documentors (who number approximately 0.1 right now), any software documentation should take advantage of it. Whatever you do to it, it should be representable in both the LyX window and the printed documentation in an obvious, common way (no ERT, etc.) and should be obvious as something which ties menu panels together. This particular triangle is used in a number of desktops to indicate that there is another menu lurking underneath an item. I would argue that it should stay in the special character menu, but if you can come up with a better name, feel free. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Why docs don't get updated very often Re: asciitilde binding bug
On 29 May 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Jules == Jules Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jules It's a relief someone agrees with me! Jules Yes, M-p asterisk num would seem like a sensible set of Jules bindings to me.. Would you have time to review the bindings and propose an update? [...] Are there other people who would object to such a change of bindings? We could also decide to keep the old ones for backward compatibility... I'm not criticizing the decision to change these bindings - improving the UI is always good, but having just seen another message about needing to update the docs about --export, I need to vent. The default user interface has to stop changing before the Doc Team can update everything. Don't stop changing it yet, but expect there to be problems until 1.2.0pre is declared ready, and everyone agrees the interface will be stable long enough for us to document it, then things will get cleaned up. In fact, we are discussing rearranging the docs to improve the layout, so small changes like this are really going to take a while before they appear in a distribution. Perhaps it's time for an Errata page on the Web. Anyone with Web CVS access willing to lead the charge? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Why docs don't get updated very often Re: asciitilde bindingbug
On 29 May 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Mike The default user interface has to stop changing before the Doc Mike Team can update everything. Don't stop changing it yet, but Mike expect there to be problems until 1.2.0pre is declared ready, Mike and everyone agrees the interface will be stable long enough for Mike us to document it, then things will get cleaned up. How long do you need? Note that it will be possible to continue updateing the docs in 1.2.x, x0 Amount of time isn't as big an issue as not knowing when the interface will settle down, and I really don't want to redocument it six times - none of us has the time to do that. I'm hoping that 1.2.0pre0 will freeze the basic interface/keybindings/commandline for at least a few versions; if so, then I would like to have the docs _completely_ updated and correct for 1.2.0 proper. The primary reason the docs are currently lagging is simply that many things have changed since 1.1.5 and are continuing to change, as indicated by the spate of messages over the last couple of days. The UI changes from 1.0.0 through 1.1.5 are actually quite small compared to 1.1.5 - current CVS. (LyX's guts changed considerably over that time, but the UI didn't). Of course, new features added after 1.2.0 will require new documentation, but I'd like existing features, like the change to math arrays, to be settled before we sharpen our pencils. (can you sharpen a keyboard ? :-) ) Sorry to be a pain in the posterior hinterregions about this, but the recent UI changes have been rather dizzying. Complicating things for me personally are the fact that I can't use 1.1.6fixX at work due to the incomplete table support, so I haven't gotten used to that yet, and CVS is also changing too fast for me to grab a stable copy and try to do some real work with it (can a useful snapshot be made occasionally?). We're just in an exciting, rapidly changing phase, and the docs are going to lag as a result - we can't document a feature before it's finished! This brought up the idea of an Errata section on the Web. At least we can collect the current inconsistencies and make them known there, so the Users don't get totally frustrated with the current situation. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Attempting (and failing) to compile natbib branch
In spite of my whining, I thought I'd sneak in an attempt to compile Angus' natbib branch, since he went to the effort to merge it with the latest main CVS branch. I cruise along okay until I get smacked with the following: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src -I./../ -I../.. -I../.. -I../../boost -isystem /usr/X11R6/include -O2 -W -Wall -Wp,-MD,.deps/insetcollapsable.pp -c insetcollapsable.C -o insetcollapsable.o In file included from ../../src/Lsstream.h:20, from ../../src/support/lstrings.h:22, from insetcollapsable.C:24: /usr/include/g++-3/sstream: In method `int stringbuf::sync ()': /usr/include/g++-3/sstream:171: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions insetcollapsable.C: In method `void InsetCollapsable::SetFont (BufferView *, const LyXFont , bool, bool)': insetcollapsable.C:448: no matching function for call to `InsetText::SetFont (BufferView *, const LyXFont , bool , bool )' insettext.h:155: candidates are: void InsetText::SetFont (BufferView *, const LyXFont , bool = false) make[3]: *** [insetcollapsable.lo] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/mressler/LyX/NATBIB/lyx-devel/src/insets' make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/mressler/LyX/NATBIB/lyx-devel/src' make[1]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/mressler/LyX/NATBIB/lyx-devel/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 It's a Mandrake 8.0 OS with gcc-2.96. Let me know if I'm doing something idiotic ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Attempting (and failing) to compile natbib branch
On Wed, 30 May 2001, John Levon wrote: On Tue, 29 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a Mandrake 8.0 OS with gcc-2.96. Let me know if I'm doing something Mandrake 8.0 comes with some version of RH gcc 2.96 ? Yuck ! What's the RPM version ? I wonder which RH version it's based on. Any RH7.0 gcc will miscompile lyx sometimes. rpm -q says gcc-2.96-0.48mdk. The last entry in the Changelog in /usr/share/doc/gcc-2.96 is from 2000-07-31. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Attempting (and failing) to compile natbib branch
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Angus Leeming wrote: On Tuesday 29 May 2001 23:36, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In spite of my whining, I thought I'd sneak in an attempt to compile Angus' natbib branch, since he went to the effort to merge it with the latest main CVS branch. I cruise along okay until I get smacked with the following: the branch doesn't yet compile, although I can now get a lot further than you. Be patient; this stuff hasn't been touched since mid February. It's taken me 24 commits to get as far as I have! Oops. I interpreted configurable to mean compilable. My mistake. I thought that if I'd go to the effort to compile a CVS version, I might as well grab your pretty, if incomplete, natbib version. I'll be patient ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Unknown function error in BRANCH_NATBIB
Hi, Still playing with the natbib branch. I was able to compile it successfully once Angus finished his update :-) Gcc-2.96 seems to have worked okay. However, now when I open a new/existing document and start typing, I get a Unknown function error printed at the bottom and no text inserted. I can open existing documents, but can't type new text. Any ideas? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Unknown function error in BRANCH_NATBIB
On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: typing, I get a Unknown function error printed at the bottom and no text inserted. I can open existing documents, but can't type new text. Any ideas? Lars wrote back about a possible bad key bindings file. That was it. I had an old ~/.lyx-cvs directory (used instead of .lyx for tinkering) and it was screwing things up. Thanks. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: future of LyX
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: Compare also with the natbib work that lives on a branch: I don't think Angus has gotten much feedback on that. This in turns results in less entuisiasm from the developer, and there is a real fear that the work will never be merged. This is very unfortunate, because it both affects the functionality of LyX, and what is worse: It might disencourage Angus from doing more of the very valuable work, we all need! This is why I made such an idiot out of myself a week or two ago when I jumped the gun on downloading and compiling the natbib CVS branch, though. I am looking forward to the day natbib is fully supported - and so are a number of other astronomers I talked to at the American Astronomical Society conference which happened in Pasadena, CA, this week - when natbib is done, we can publish papers in the US journals with virtually no hand edits after an Export-LaTeX. So the interest and enthusiasm are there. Now that I'm done with the conference, I might actually have time to try out the branch to see how it's going (I know it isn't finished yet). So don't fear - the enthusiasm is there, and Angus knows it (at least, I try to make sure he doesn't forget!). Not many of us have the time to tinker with CVS versions of LyX, but I will try ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Picture preview rendering error under Solaris
On 7 Jun 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Picture preview does not work with ghostscript 6.00--6.50 I haven't had any problem with 6.01. Later versions, yes ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
OS/2 help needed Re: Lyx User's Guide
Hello Jeff, I'm forwarding your email to the LyX Developer's list since I haven't a clue what might be hanging you up. Hopefully someone there will know. Also, please let us know what version of LyX you are using, whether you compiled it yourself, and if so, what xforms library you are using, etc. Mike On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings from New Zealand, I am attempting to use Lyx under OS/2 and am having some problems with the User's Guide (everything else is working fine so far). I checked the faq but could find nothing about my problem. Looking at the User's Guide file with emacs, I see your name in the beginning as the temporary maintainer of the guide, so I am writing to you in hopes that you can give me a hint or two. Here is the situation: I installed the latest versions of XFree86 and Lyx downloaded from Hobbes yesterday. X and Lyx both seem to start correctly, and I can make and save my own documents in Lyx. I can also read the Lyx Introduction, Tutorial, and Extended available through the Lyx Help menu. But I cannot read the User's Guide (which is pretty crucial for someone with my background). When I try to open it, Lyx displays the message Loading font into X server in its gray message window at the bottom, and it stays like this indefinitely (20 minutes). I have downloaded and installed all of what appear to be the standard fonts available on Hobbes: misc, 75dpi, 100dpi, Type1, speedo, even cyrillic. Do you have any idea what else I need to do in order to read the User's Guide in Lyx? Or, if not, who I might ask? Thanks very much for your time, Jeff Prof Jeff Miller Dept of Psychology University of Otago Dunedin, New Zealand International FAX: 64-3-479-8335 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://psy.otago.ac.nz/miller -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Who!
On 12 Jan 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > ...wants to do the announcement for LyX 1.1.6? > > and don't forget to update the web site... > > go get at > > ftp.lyx.org or ftp.devel.lyx.org Argh! It's looks like my doc CVS updates were about an hour late. Sigh. Intro and the UG should be up to date with 1.1.6, the "pre's" at least. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Stupid cucumber in 1.1.6 splash screen
Hi guys, I noticed the cucumber escaped from CVS into the 1.1.6 distribution. It's okay for CVS, but doesn't exactly convey the supposed seriousness of the development effort. Please kill it. (No smileys.) Now back to more late documentation ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Another book written using LyX
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001, Alejandro Aguilar Sierra wrote: > Did anybody know about this book on postgresql? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/awbook.html > > IMHO the link should be somewhere in the users site, in a section "Who > uses LyX". There should be also some other success stories that > have been sent to this list, like Garst's ones. Ahem. It's in the FAQ - Section 1.2 "That's fine, but is it useful?". It's time to get the @#$% FAQ on the web page. Anyone want to make a whizzy thing to update an HTML page automatically when I update the LyX file in CVS? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Old docs in 1.1.6
I was about to tell someone in the User's list to RTFM, when I found that the docs in 1.1.6 are ancient (at least two weeks old :-). Lars, did you forget to update them before you created 1.1.6? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Old docs in 1.1.6 - Never Mind.
On 17 Jan 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | I was about to tell someone in the User's list to RTFM, when I found that > | the docs in 1.1.6 are ancient (at least two weeks old :-). Lars, did you > | forget to update them before you created 1.1.6? > > Or have you been commiting to the wrong branch? > > When I "make dist" the documentation is automatically gotten from cvs. Never mind - I must have had a bad "make install" so that some old version of LyX wasn't completely overwritten. I just reran the make again, and everything is now fine. I can now tell people to RTFM again in good conscience :-). Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Another book written using LyX
On 18 Jan 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Mike" == <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mike> Ahem. It's in the FAQ - Section 1.2 "That's fine, but is it > Mike> useful?". It's time to get the @#$% FAQ on the web page. Anyone > Mike> want to make a whizzy thing to update an HTML page automatically > Mike> when I update the LyX file in CVS? > > You mean here? > http://www.sad.it/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/FAQ/node2.html#SECTION00022000 Yes, I know that exists (and I'm glad it does), but there should be a pointer on the www.lyx.org front page that points to an autogenerated FAQ.html derived from the lyxdoc CVS. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: deleting one line from multiline equation
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Tuukka Toivonen wrote: > This feels like simple question but I cannot find answer from LyX > documents. How can I delete one line from multiline math equation? > > User Guide says M-e k but it doesn't work with 1.1.6. I couldn't find the > command from reference manual. I noticed this on while working on the new keybindings for Reference.lyx, so I have forwarded this message to the developer list. Devvies, any comment? Mike - your humble documentation guy ... -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Repeated request to change "Figure" to "Graphic"
Hi guys (and girls, if there are any reading), Since you are munging the user layout and file formats right now, I would like to repeat my request of a few months ago to change the name of Insert->Figure to Insert->Graphic. The reasons are several: 1) A "figure" as defined by LaTeX does not require an EPS file. It is simply a floating "thing". 2) LyX's current definition of "figure float" fits the more commonly accepted English definition of a "figure". 3) With the new effort to handle non-EPS graphical formats, "figure" is even more of a misnomer. "Graphic", "picture", or "image" would all be more acceptable. I would propose changing Insert->Figure to Insert->Graphic Insert->Tabular to Insert->Tabular Material Insert->Floats->Figure Float to Insert->Floats->Figure Insert->Floats->Table Float to Insert->Floats->Table Insert->Floats->Wide Figure Float to Insert->Floats->Wide Figure Insert->Floats->Wide Table Float to Insert->Floats->Wide Table Insert->Floats->Algorithm Float to Insert->Floats->Algorithm Please change this. I know it's only a trivial user interface issue, but it's a blaringly obvious one. I'd like to move us from LaTeXese to English. Mike P.S. And I'd be happy to change the documentation accordingly :-) -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Repeated request to change "Figure" to "Graphic"
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Please change this. I know it's only a trivial user interface issue, but > it's a blaringly obvious one. I'd like to move us from LaTeXese to > English. And yes, I mean for 1.1.6fix1! Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Repeated request to change "Figure" to "Graphic"
On 24 Jan 2001, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | Since you are munging the user layout and file formats right now, I would > | like to repeat my request of a few months ago to change the name of > | Insert->Figure to Insert->Graphic. The reasons are several: > > I agree with this change, but not quite sure about 1.1.6fix1. Okay, fix2 :-) The important thing is that I do not want to see it forgotten again, and it's important enough that I think it should be done "soon". The impact to the code should be low, but of course, nothing is ever as simple as it appears ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Repeated request to change "Figure" to "Graphic"
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Garst R. Reese wrote: > I agree completely with this. The current terminology is gobbledegook if > you are not a latex guru. And I second the motion to do it for fix1. > Even with Mike's excellent suggestions, but why not just Insert->Table > for Insert->Tabular. > The word tabular implies to me things like lists as well as tables, but > when I click on Insert->Tabular, I get the table layout box. This is a sticky one, and I haven't come up with a really good one yet. My "Tabular Material" suggestion was to indicate that this is where the table "box" comes from, while "Table" was the thing which floats around and includes a title/caption and is where you stick a "Tabular Material". If anyone has a better nomenclature for this, please suggest it. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: patch for default.ui
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, R. Lahaye wrote: > 1) I renamed the 'Insert->Graphics' entry into 'Figure' (as it was before). > Although there is (will be?) a new graphics inset, I suggest to stick to call > it "Figure", to stay closer to LaTeX terminology. NOO! I know Lars already responded, but I want to yell again. I suggested renaiming this to "graphic" precisely because 1) we need to get away from LaTeXisms, and 2) this isn't even how LaTeX uses it. A LaTeX figure is what we currently call a "figure float". That's really bad, and I suggested calling it simply "figure", since that is what the rest of the world would call it. What LyX called a figure, LaTeX loads with includegraphics, and is what the rest of the (English speaking) world would call a graphic, image, picture, etc., but not "figure". I'm willing to accept the existing terminology for 1.1.6fix?, but it should be changed by 1.2.0. Back to my cave ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: New feature: Bookmarks in LyX?
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:42:31PM +0900, R. Lahaye wrote: > > Well, if "Figures" are called "Graphics", then my change my be of no > > good. But then "Insert->Floats->Figure" and "Insert->Floats->Wide Figure" > > should be renamed to "Graphics" and "Wide Graphics". Don't you think? No! > I don't have any formed opinion for this. But at least it look coherent. :-) No wonder I didn't see many responses to your original article - the Subject changed. I beg you to look in the lyx-devel archives for my original renaming proposal. I actually did think about this for more than a few microseconds, and there was a method to my renaming madness. There are very specific definitions of the things we currently (incorrectly) call figures, figure floats, etc. Please find the original thread. (Search on Insert-Graphic.) Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Math mode (sort of) bug
In the old days, if I typed "M-m g m m" I would get the greek letter mu followed by an m - the usual symbol for micrometer (or micron). With 1.1.6fix1, if I type this sequence, the mu is created, but the cursor stays at the front edge of the math box, so that the m is then placed in front of the mu, instead of after it. Not a devastating bug, but an annoying one, since infrared astronomy is full of microns ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Bug in float fig captions
Hi, The figure caption in a float appears to be immune to justification commands: setting left, right, center, or block has no effect. And worse, the state it is in is "center", which is probably the worst of the 4 possibilities (well, maybe right would be worse). Reopening Layout->Paragraph always shows the radio button at "center", no matter what you did before. The perverse thing is that the DVI always shows the caption as "block", as it should. This is 1.1.6fix1. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: 1.1.6fix1 stability?
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> On 15-Feb-2001 Michael Schmitt wrote:
> > However, it is my impression that 1.1.6 has been released a bit too early
>
> Well the problem is that we wouldn't have found all the problems with
> the tabulars so fast if we wouldn't have released it to public, only
> few people try cvs-versions HARD :)
\begin{no_smiley_day}
We are not Micro$oft - there is no excuse for using normal users as bug
finders. I actually threw out 1.1.6fix1 and reverted back to 1.1.5fix2;
and I supposedly know what I'm doing. The tabular bugs, the greek letter
math bug, etc. were just too much, and so I nuked it. The sad thing is, I
was trying to convince a colleague that LyX was such a wonderful tool. She
tried 1.1.6fix1 on an instrument manual that I had written, but got so
frustrated that she swore it off and asked for a LaTeX dump to work on
instead. This is not the way to win new users.
I'm not criticizing all the wonderful work you all are doing. I really do
like what I see in 1.1.6 and am looking forward to the new things in 1.2
and beyond, and I'll still be here to help document them. But 1.1.6 (and
fix1) should never have been released as a public, "stable" version,
particularly since it was known that the tabular code wasn't complete.
\end{no_smiley_day}
I've been trying to figure out a polite way to say this for some time.
Juergen just pushed me over the edge :-)
Mike
--
Mike Ressler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: 1.1.6fix1 stability?
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Juergen Vigna wrote: > On 16-Feb-2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I've been trying to figure out a polite way to say this for some time. > > Juergen just pushed me over the edge :-) > > Well you shouldn't have put that smily there on a friday, you're a heretic! ;) > >Jürgen (who still thinks we did the right choice) Only a little heretical :-) I wanted to show a little annoyance without being completely rude about it. I know you want a lot of people to test such things; I just wish another pre or two had been released first (but then that would have annoyed Lars :-) So not every one can be completely happy. I still think there needs to be some way of warning people about the stability of the release without surprising them. I now refuse to upgrade from 1.1.5fix2 for real work until I'm sure the new release is just as stable. I can't afford to get caught again with a not-quite-complete version of LyX the day a conference proceeding paper is due (which happened to me with 1.1.6). Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: another patch...
On 5 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I tried the "benchmark" a bit here, and the times in successive rune > fluctuate enough that I do not see how you can interpret them... This wins the "Cool Typo" award. When reading your (the developers') discussions of compilers, pragmas, etc. my head spins enough that you may as well be benchmarking in "successive runes", because I am certain that you are practicing spells and engaged in the black arts. Maybe it's time to support Peter Wilson's excellent archaic fonts, e.g. ctan:/tex-archive/fonts/archaic/runic. :-) Happy Monday! Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Menu Separator aka lyxarrow
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, John Levon wrote: > Why do we have this ? It seems a bit ad hoc. Is it just for > the convenience of the doc writers or something ? Put on your asbestos suit! John Weiss is going to hunt you down and smack you with his small fish :-) (Find a message from him and look at his signature.) We had a big row about this a couple of years ago when we discussed the proper format for the "arrow" to be used in the documentation for things like File->Open. I don't remember exactly how we settled on that particular rotated triangle, but it was deemed Holy and Pure, and thus became policy. While it is certainly crucial for the LyX documentors (who number approximately 0.1 right now), any software documentation should take advantage of it. Whatever you do to it, it should be representable in both the LyX window and the printed documentation in an obvious, common way (no ERT, etc.) and should be obvious as something which ties menu panels together. This particular triangle is used in a number of desktops to indicate that there is another menu lurking underneath an item. I would argue that it should stay in the special character menu, but if you can come up with a better name, feel free. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Why docs don't get updated very often Re: asciitilde binding bug
On 29 May 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Jules" == Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jules> It's a relief someone agrees with me! > Jules> Yes, M-p asterisk would seem like a sensible set of > Jules> bindings to me.. > Would you have time to review the bindings and propose an update? > [...] > Are there other people who would object to such a change of bindings? > We could also decide to keep the old ones for backward compatibility... I'm not criticizing the decision to change these bindings - improving the UI is always good, but having just seen another message about needing to update the docs about --export, I need to vent. The default user interface has to stop changing before the Doc Team can update everything. Don't stop changing it yet, but expect there to be problems until 1.2.0pre is declared ready, and everyone agrees the interface will be stable long enough for us to document it, then things will get cleaned up. In fact, we are discussing rearranging the docs to improve the layout, so small changes like this are really going to take a while before they appear in a distribution. Perhaps it's time for an Errata page on the Web. Anyone with Web CVS access willing to lead the charge? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Why docs don't get updated very often Re: asciitilde bindingbug
On 29 May 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Mike> The default user interface has to stop changing before the Doc > Mike> Team can update everything. Don't stop changing it yet, but > Mike> expect there to be problems until 1.2.0pre is declared ready, > Mike> and everyone agrees the interface will be stable long enough for > Mike> us to document it, then things will get cleaned up. > > How long do you need? Note that it will be possible to continue > updateing the docs in 1.2.x, x>0 Amount of time isn't as big an issue as not knowing when the interface will settle down, and I really don't want to redocument it six times - none of us has the time to do that. I'm hoping that 1.2.0pre0 will freeze the basic interface/keybindings/commandline for at least a few versions; if so, then I would like to have the docs _completely_ updated and correct for 1.2.0 proper. The primary reason the docs are currently lagging is simply that many things have changed since 1.1.5 and are continuing to change, as indicated by the spate of messages over the last couple of days. The UI changes from 1.0.0 through 1.1.5 are actually quite small compared to 1.1.5 -> current CVS. (LyX's guts changed considerably over that time, but the UI didn't). Of course, new features added after 1.2.0 will require new documentation, but I'd like existing features, like the change to math arrays, to be settled before we sharpen our pencils. (can you sharpen a keyboard ? :-) ) Sorry to be a pain in the posterior hinterregions about this, but the recent UI changes have been rather dizzying. Complicating things for me personally are the fact that I can't use 1.1.6fixX at work due to the incomplete table support, so I haven't gotten used to that yet, and CVS is also changing too fast for me to grab a "stable" copy and try to do some real work with it (can a "useful" snapshot be made occasionally?). We're just in an exciting, rapidly changing phase, and the docs are going to lag as a result - we can't document a feature before it's finished! This brought up the idea of an Errata section on the Web. At least we can collect the current inconsistencies and make them known there, so the Users don't get totally frustrated with the current situation. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Attempting (and failing) to compile natbib branch
In spite of my whining, I thought I'd sneak in an attempt to compile Angus' natbib branch, since he went to the effort to merge it with the latest main CVS branch. I cruise along okay until I get smacked with the following: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src -I./../ -I../.. -I../.. -I../../boost -isystem /usr/X11R6/include -O2 -W -Wall -Wp,-MD,.deps/insetcollapsable.pp -c insetcollapsable.C -o insetcollapsable.o In file included from ../../src/Lsstream.h:20, from ../../src/support/lstrings.h:22, from insetcollapsable.C:24: /usr/include/g++-3/sstream: In method `int stringbuf::sync ()': /usr/include/g++-3/sstream:171: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions insetcollapsable.C: In method `void InsetCollapsable::SetFont (BufferView *, const LyXFont &, bool, bool)': insetcollapsable.C:448: no matching function for call to `InsetText::SetFont (BufferView *&, const LyXFont &, bool &, bool &)' insettext.h:155: candidates are: void InsetText::SetFont (BufferView *, const LyXFont &, bool = false) make[3]: *** [insetcollapsable.lo] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/mressler/LyX/NATBIB/lyx-devel/src/insets' make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/mressler/LyX/NATBIB/lyx-devel/src' make[1]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/mressler/LyX/NATBIB/lyx-devel/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 It's a Mandrake 8.0 OS with gcc-2.96. Let me know if I'm doing something idiotic ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Attempting (and failing) to compile natbib branch
On Wed, 30 May 2001, John Levon wrote: > On Tue, 29 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > It's a Mandrake 8.0 OS with gcc-2.96. Let me know if I'm doing something > > Mandrake 8.0 comes with some version of RH gcc 2.96 ? Yuck ! > What's the RPM version ? I wonder which RH version it's based on. Any RH7.0 gcc > will miscompile lyx sometimes. rpm -q says "gcc-2.96-0.48mdk". The last entry in the Changelog in /usr/share/doc/gcc-2.96 is from 2000-07-31. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Attempting (and failing) to compile natbib branch
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Angus Leeming wrote: > On Tuesday 29 May 2001 23:36, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In spite of my whining, I thought I'd sneak in an attempt to compile > > Angus' natbib branch, since he went to the effort to merge it with the > > latest main CVS branch. I cruise along okay until I get smacked with the > > following: > > the branch doesn't yet compile, although I can now get a lot further than > you. Be patient; this stuff hasn't been touched since mid February. It's > taken me 24 commits to get as far as I have! Oops. I interpreted "configurable" to mean "compilable". My mistake. I thought that if I'd go to the effort to compile a CVS version, I might as well grab your pretty, if incomplete, natbib version. I'll be patient ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Unknown function error in BRANCH_NATBIB
Hi, Still playing with the natbib branch. I was able to compile it successfully once Angus finished his update :-) Gcc-2.96 seems to have worked okay. However, now when I open a new/existing document and start typing, I get a "Unknown function" error printed at the bottom and no text inserted. I can open existing documents, but can't type new text. Any ideas? Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Unknown function error in BRANCH_NATBIB
On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > typing, I get a "Unknown function" error printed at the bottom and no text > inserted. I can open existing documents, but can't type new text. Any > ideas? Lars wrote back about a possible bad key bindings file. That was it. I had an old ~/.lyx-cvs directory (used instead of .lyx for tinkering) and it was screwing things up. Thanks. Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: future of LyX
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: > Compare also with the natbib work that lives on a branch: I don't think > Angus has gotten much feedback on that. This in turns results in less > entuisiasm from the developer, and there is a real fear that the work will > never be merged. This is very unfortunate, because it both affects the > functionality of LyX, and what is worse: It might disencourage Angus from > doing more of the very valuable work, we all need! This is why I made such an idiot out of myself a week or two ago when I jumped the gun on downloading and compiling the natbib CVS branch, though. I am looking forward to the day natbib is fully supported - and so are a number of other astronomers I talked to at the American Astronomical Society conference which happened in Pasadena, CA, this week - when natbib is done, we can publish papers in the US journals with virtually no hand edits after an Export->LaTeX. So the interest and enthusiasm are there. Now that I'm done with the conference, I might actually have time to try out the branch to see how it's going (I know it isn't finished yet). So don't fear - the enthusiasm is there, and Angus knows it (at least, I try to make sure he doesn't forget!). Not many of us have the time to tinker with CVS versions of LyX, but I will try ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
Re: Picture preview rendering error under Solaris
On 7 Jun 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Picture preview does not work with ghostscript 6.00--6.50 I haven't had any problem with 6.01. Later versions, yes ... Mike -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
OS/2 help needed Re: Lyx User's Guide
Hello Jeff, I'm forwarding your email to the LyX Developer's list since I haven't a clue what might be hanging you up. Hopefully someone there will know. Also, please let us know what version of LyX you are using, whether you compiled it yourself, and if so, what xforms library you are using, etc. Mike On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Greetings from New Zealand, > > I am attempting to use Lyx under OS/2 and am having > some problems with the User's Guide (everything else > is working fine so far). I checked the faq but could > find nothing about my problem. Looking at the User's > Guide file with emacs, I see your name in the beginning > as the temporary maintainer of the guide, so I am > writing to you in hopes that you can give me a hint or two. > > Here is the situation: > > I installed the latest versions of XFree86 and Lyx > downloaded from Hobbes yesterday. > > X and Lyx both seem to start correctly, and I can > make and save my own documents in Lyx. I can > also read the Lyx Introduction, Tutorial, and > Extended available through the Lyx Help menu. > > But I cannot read the User's Guide (which is pretty > crucial for someone with my background). When I > try to open it, Lyx displays the message "Loading > font into X server" in its gray message window at > the bottom, and it stays like this indefinitely (20 minutes). > > I have downloaded and installed all of what appear > to be the standard fonts available on Hobbes: >misc, 75dpi, 100dpi, Type1, speedo, even cyrillic. > > Do you have any idea what else I need to do in order to > read the User's Guide in Lyx? Or, if not, who I might ask? > > Thanks very much for your time, > > Jeff > > Prof Jeff Miller > Dept of Psychology > University of Otago > Dunedin, New Zealand > International FAX: 64-3-479-8335 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://psy.otago.ac.nz/miller > -- Mike Ressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, I'm lame: I don't have my own website ...
