Re: Goals for alpha 1

On 2010-02-01, José Matos wrote: On Friday 29 January 2010 22:38:05 Peter Kümmel wrote: So I propose to rename it to 0.19 because we have always evolved and never had any real revolution. We had the transition to Unicode but missed it (version number wise). LyX 1.6.x is a different beast

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On 2010-02-01, José Matos wrote: > On Friday 29 January 2010 22:38:05 Peter Kümmel wrote: > So I propose to rename it to 0.19 because we have always evolved and > never had any real revolution. We had the transition to Unicode but missed it (version number wise). > LyX 1.6.x is a different

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Friday 29 January 2010 22:38:05 Peter Kümmel wrote: Read the Table of contents at http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 most looks like bug/missing-feature fixing. This is maybe only my perception, but imagine a non-hacker/user-only reads this list, he would wonder why we've decided to name

Re: Goals for alpha 1

José Matos wrote: On Friday 29 January 2010 22:38:05 Peter Kümmel wrote: Read the Table of contents at http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 most looks like bug/missing-feature fixing. This is maybe only my perception, but imagine a non-hacker/user-only reads this list, he would wonder why

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Monday 01 February 2010 11:17:54 Peter Kümmel wrote: I don't insist on 2.0. I only think to make the jump to 2.0 now is without a reason. We missed the chance to name it 2.0 when releasing 1.6, so why should we do it now. Assume we introduce a new file-format,would we relase 3.0 then?

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Monday 01 February 2010 06:44:29 José Matos wrote: On Monday 01 February 2010 11:17:54 Peter Kümmel wrote: I don't insist on 2.0. I only think to make the jump to 2.0 now is without a reason. We missed the chance to name it 2.0 when releasing 1.6, so why should we do it now. Assume we

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Monday 01 February 2010 12:36:45 Steve Litt wrote: Depends on the user. A lot of us read and create LyX programmatically or with a text editor. I am well aware of that, and appendix of my PhD thesis was created that way. :-) I have used a python program to generate the whole lyx file and

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Friday 29 January 2010 22:38:05 Peter Kümmel wrote: > Read the "Table of contents" at > http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 > > most looks like "bug/missing-feature" fixing. This is maybe > only my perception, but imagine a "non-hacker/user-only" reads > this list, he would wonder why we've

Re: Goals for alpha 1

José Matos wrote: > On Friday 29 January 2010 22:38:05 Peter Kümmel wrote: >> Read the "Table of contents" at >> http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 >> >> most looks like "bug/missing-feature" fixing. This is maybe >> only my perception, but imagine a "non-hacker/user-only" reads >> this list, he

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Monday 01 February 2010 11:17:54 Peter Kümmel wrote: > I don't insist on 2.0. I only think to make the jump to 2.0 now is without > a reason. We missed the chance to name it 2.0 when releasing 1.6, so why > should we do it now. Assume we introduce a new file-format,would we relase > 3.0 then?

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Monday 01 February 2010 06:44:29 José Matos wrote: > On Monday 01 February 2010 11:17:54 Peter Kümmel wrote: > > I don't insist on 2.0. I only think to make the jump to 2.0 now is > > without a reason. We missed the chance to name it 2.0 when releasing > > 1.6, so why should we do it now.

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Monday 01 February 2010 12:36:45 Steve Litt wrote: > Depends on the user. A lot of us read and create LyX programmatically or > with a text editor. I am well aware of that, and appendix of my PhD thesis was created that way. :-) I have used a python program to generate the whole lyx file

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Friday 15 January 2010 19:42:30 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: Any other opinions suggestions? - please do some definitive decision about version number now. i have asked about the opinions few days ago, whoever has something to say got his chance. the result was 2:1 for

Re: Goals for alpha 1

Am Freitag, den 29.01.2010, 18:30 + schrieb José Matos: On Friday 15 January 2010 19:42:30 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: Any other opinions suggestions? - please do some definitive decision about version number now. i have asked about the opinions few days ago, whoever

Re: Goals for alpha 1

Peter Kümmel schreef: Am Freitag, den 29.01.2010, 18:30 + schrieb José Matos: On Friday 15 January 2010 19:42:30 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: Any other opinions suggestions? - please do some definitive decision about version number now. i have

Re: Goals for alpha 1

Am Freitag, den 29.01.2010, 22:55 +0100 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: What revolution do you expect for 2.0 then ? (or are we back at the XML-thing now ?) Read the Table of contents at http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 most looks like bug/missing-feature fixing. This is maybe only my

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Friday 15 January 2010 19:42:30 Pavel Sanda wrote: > José Matos wrote: > > Any other opinions suggestions? > > - please do some definitive decision about version number now. > i have asked about the opinions few days ago, whoever has something > to say got his chance. the result was

Re: Goals for alpha 1

Am Freitag, den 29.01.2010, 18:30 + schrieb José Matos: > On Friday 15 January 2010 19:42:30 Pavel Sanda wrote: > > José Matos wrote: > > > Any other opinions suggestions? > > > > - please do some definitive decision about version number now. > > i have asked about the opinions few days

Re: Goals for alpha 1

Peter Kümmel schreef: Am Freitag, den 29.01.2010, 18:30 + schrieb José Matos: On Friday 15 January 2010 19:42:30 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: Any other opinions suggestions? - please do some definitive decision about version number now. i have

Re: Goals for alpha 1

Am Freitag, den 29.01.2010, 22:55 +0100 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn:> > > > What revolution do you expect for 2.0 then ? (or are we back at the > XML-thing now ?) Read the "Table of contents" at http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 most looks like "bug/missing-feature" fixing. This is maybe

Goals for alpha 1

Hi all, trying to synthesize the different threads we had this week it seems that there is a consensus that we are ready (^H late) to release the first alpha. As it is usual with the alpha stage this means that lyx builds (and hopefully works) on our support platforms. Those

Re: Goals for alpha 1

José Matos jama...@fc.up.pt writes: Any other opinions suggestions? I guess the question is what we need before alpha 1. One thing I would like to see (at least before real release) is a ui2ui/bind2bind/rc2rc infrastructure. If some nice python hacker (hint!) were to provide the

Re: Goals for alpha 1

José Matos wrote: Any other opinions suggestions? - please do some definitive decision about version number now. i have asked about the opinions few days ago, whoever has something to say got his chance. the result was 2:1 for 1.7 so you have the royal choice :) - i miss some

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Friday 15 January 2010 16:54:15 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: José Matos jama...@fc.up.pt writes: Any other opinions suggestions? I guess the question is what we need before alpha 1. One thing I would like to see (at least before real release) is a ui2ui/bind2bind/rc2rc

Goals for alpha 1

Hi all, trying to synthesize the different threads we had this week it seems that there is a consensus that we are ready (^H late) to release the first alpha. As it is usual with the alpha stage this means that lyx builds (and hopefully works) on our support platforms. Those

Re: Goals for alpha 1

José Matos writes: > Any other opinions suggestions? I guess the question is what we need before alpha 1. One thing I would like to see (at least before real release) is a ui2ui/bind2bind/rc2rc infrastructure. If some nice python hacker (hint!) were to provide the

Re: Goals for alpha 1

José Matos wrote: > Any other opinions suggestions? - please do some definitive decision about version number now. i have asked about the opinions few days ago, whoever has something to say got his chance. the result was 2:1 for 1.7 so you have the royal choice :) - i miss some

Re: Goals for alpha 1

On Friday 15 January 2010 16:54:15 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > José Matos writes: > > Any other opinions suggestions? > > I guess the question is what we need before alpha 1. One thing I would > like to see (at least before real release) is a ui2ui/bind2bind/rc2rc >