On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:02:09PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> Richard, this is a different issue. The user can always set -shell-escape
> and we can't prevent him from doing that. If the user is bothered from
> having to set the option and then delete it again, it may happen that
> he
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 01:46:45AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 06/12/2017 08:08 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:49:50PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 07:37:53PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> >>
> >>> However, I think I have to wait
On 06/12/2017 08:08 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:49:50PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 07:37:53PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>>
>>> However, I think I have to wait for a nod before applying this patch.
>> Thanks for waiting. I think
Am Montag, den 12.06.2017, 19:37 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> The attached patch does this. It hooks into the needauth machinery
> and
> everytime any latex converter is called to typeset a minted document,
> the needauth dialogs are used. It is not needed to explicitly set the
> needauth
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:49:50PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 07:37:53PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>
> > However, I think I have to wait for a nod before applying this patch.
>
> Thanks for waiting. I think there is indeed a chance Guillaume would be
> against
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:49:49PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:50:23PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>
> > > In that case I think I'd prefer a combo box "Code highlighting package:
> > > Listings|Minted" or somesuch.
> >
> > I tried to be minimalist in the
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 07:37:53PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> However, I think I have to wait for a nod before applying this patch.
Thanks for waiting. I think there is indeed a chance Guillaume would be
against it, and if even one person is against it since it is related to
security I
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:50:23PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> > In that case I think I'd prefer a combo box "Code highlighting package:
> > Listings|Minted" or somesuch.
>
> I tried to be minimalist in the changes, but if Scott agrees I could also
> do that. This could delay
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 10:07:55AM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> But currently, it isn't. The note in the minted example file advises users
> to set the flag. And they would explicitly have to reset it every time.
> Chance is high that they just keep it eventually. That's my point.
I agree
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 10:07:55AM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> 2017-06-11 19:50 GMT+02:00 Enrico Forestieri :
> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:23:45PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> > >
> > > As I said, I propose that the user has to explicitly acknowledge a
> > > warning
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 10:07:55AM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>
> I meant: Is the checkbox disabled in context where it does not make sense
> (i.e., for docbook classes?)
No, it isn't, but it is irrelevant in this case. Currently, you can
also enter parameters even if they have no meaning
2017-06-11 19:50 GMT+02:00 Enrico Forestieri :
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:23:45PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>
> > Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 18:32 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> > > I don't think that listings is less advanced in code highlighting.
> > > The
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 10:57:18PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 11. Juni 2017 um 22:19:15, schrieb Enrico Forestieri
>
> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:23:45PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> > > Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 18:32 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> >
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 10:19:15PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>
> Maybe, the only sensible thing to do is checking for a pygmentize command
> and, if not found, warn the user but don't disable the widget.
Something like the attached.
--
Enrico
diff --git a/lib/configure.py
Am Sonntag, 11. Juni 2017 um 22:19:15, schrieb Enrico Forestieri
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:23:45PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 18:32 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> > > > I also think this widget should be disabled if not all necessary
>
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:23:45PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 18:32 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> > > I also think this widget should be disabled if not all necessary
> > > packages are installed.
> >
> > This is problematic, because we should check for
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 07:23:45PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 18:32 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> > I don't think that listings is less advanced in code highlighting.
> > The advantage of minted is that it is less sensitive to the encoding.
> > All
Le 11/06/2017 à 16:23, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit :
And LyX should add the -shell-escape flag for
minted documents (but warn the user before issuing it).
Hi Jürgen, this is being discussed in this thread:
https://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg200515.html
Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 18:32 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> I don't think that listings is less advanced in code highlighting.
> The advantage of minted is that it is less sensitive to the encoding.
> All workarounds adopted for listings are not necessary for minted.
> I also like better
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:23:45PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 13:58 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> > - Use minted
> > + Use minted
>
> Is there a label that is less opaque to people who do not know what
> "minted" is? Something that highlights
Am Sonntag, den 11.06.2017, 13:58 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> - Use minted
> + Use minted
Is there a label that is less opaque to people who do not know what
"minted" is? Something that highlights the benefits one gets when
clicking this widget? E.g., "Advanced code highlighting"
21 matches
Mail list logo