Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:49:57PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 08:13:01PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:35:35PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, den 09.08.2017, 17:11 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > > > > Please,

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 08:13:01PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:35:35PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, den 09.08.2017, 17:11 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > > > Please, can you check if the attached patch addresses your concern? > > > >

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:35:35PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 09.08.2017, 17:11 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > > Please, can you check if the attached patch addresses your concern? > > Yes, it does. Thanks. I don't know whether this counts as an explicit consent to

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Mittwoch, den 09.08.2017, 17:11 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > Please, can you check if the attached patch addresses your concern? Yes, it does. Thanks. Jürgen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 04:01:40PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 25.07.2017, 21:19 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 11:11:36AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > It did feel strange that the "OK" and "Apply" buttons

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Dienstag, den 25.07.2017, 21:19 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 11:11:36AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > It did feel strange that the "OK" and "Apply" buttons were not > > > enabled > > > when checking the "Allow running external

Re: How to access the list efficiently? Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On 08/05/2017 10:49 AM, mn wrote: On 05.08.17 16:26, Paul A. Rubin wrote: FWIW, I subscribe through GMail, using a filter to put the dev and user lists in separated virtual folders, but access my GMail account in Thunderbird (IMAP). The messages are individual. I don't know if there's a way to

Re: How to access the list efficiently? Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On 08/05/2017 10:49 AM, mn wrote: On 05.08.17 16:26, Paul A. Rubin wrote: FWIW, I subscribe through GMail, using a filter to put the dev and user lists in separated virtual folders, but access my GMail account in Thunderbird (IMAP). The messages are individual. I don't know if there's a way to

Re: How to access the list efficiently? Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On 05.08.17 16:26, Paul A. Rubin wrote: > FWIW, I subscribe through GMail, using a filter to put the dev and user > lists in separated virtual folders, but access my GMail account in > Thunderbird (IMAP). The messages are individual. I don't know if there's > a way to maintain threads in

Re: How to access the list efficiently? Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On 08/04/2017 10:02 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 08:22:40AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: On 2 August 2017 at 10:03, Scott Kostyshak wrote: I'm using gmail's web interface these days. This might be why I'm finding it difficult to efficiently

Re: How to access the list efficiently? Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 08:22:40AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > On 2 August 2017 at 10:03, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'm using gmail's web interface these days. This might be why I'm finding > > > it difficult to efficiently follow threads that are so

Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

Christian Ridderström wrote: > On 2 August 2017 at 11:29, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > Ah I did not realize you did that on purpose. I actually found it > > annoying when > > > I wanted to go up the discussion and couldn't because it was cut off > > > > +1

Re: Discussing minted/safety/etc (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On 02/08/2017 01:00, Christian Ridderström wrote: The long threads likely by now do contain a lot of separate pieces of description, but it's unfortunately not so easy (at least for me) to find this information among all the posts. [...] Or perhaps to copy them to into one place, adding minor

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 02/08/2017 17:45, Richard Heck wrote: do even better. [...] People who have the expertise to design a new solution, and then to implement it, whether via AppArmor or whatever, should feel free to make it a priority for 2.4 and create a feature branch for it. +1, I'll take some time to

How to access the list efficiently? Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On 2 August 2017 at 10:03, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > > I'm using gmail's web interface these days. This might be why I'm finding > > it difficult to efficiently follow threads that are so long. > > - The gmail labs thing I used for replying to parts of an e-mail is no > >

Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On 2 August 2017 at 11:29, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > Ah I did not realize you did that on purpose. I actually found it > annoying when > > I wanted to go up the discussion and couldn't because it was cut off > > +1 > I just want to check you understood that

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Dear Scott, dear Enrico, dear LyX developers, On 2017-08-02, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:05:19AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: >> I expected the point about a second vote being unfair, but since I did not >> consider the first vote fair (due to my poor structuring of

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:11:47PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 11:04:01AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:01:58PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > > > > On 08/02/2017 07:25 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 10:58:43AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 04:57:33AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:43:04AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > > Corrected at 44babaf6. > > > > Thanks, that works well. The only other comment I

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 11:04:01AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:01:58PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > > On 08/02/2017 07:25 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:05:19AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > >> [[So the situation is as Richard

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:01:58PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > On 08/02/2017 07:25 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:05:19AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > >> [[So the situation is as Richard described it:]] we can of course decide > >> to remove something before the

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 04:57:33AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:43:04AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > Corrected at 44babaf6. > > Thanks, that works well. The only other comment I have is to possibly > instruct the user to reconfigure after installing the

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Mittwoch, 2. August 2017 um 16:11:42, schrieb Guillaume MM > Le 01/08/2017 à 10:50, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:07:11PM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: > > > >> I am sure that Scott meant to include in some way the option that I have > >> been advocating

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 08/02/2017 10:11 AM, Guillaume MM wrote: > Please do not let Enrico's new attacks affect you. Can we please put an end to this kind of public comment? If you want to make such remarks privately, that is totally reasonable. But this sort of snark is totally uncalled for, and it is not helping

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 08/02/2017 07:25 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:05:19AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: >> [[So the situation is as Richard described it:]] we can of course decide to >> remove something before the final release. > Moreover, this last sentence means that you still want

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 08/01/2017 07:13 PM, Christian Ridderström wrote: > On 1 August 2017 at 21:24, Richard Heck > wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > It sounds like you complain about the time spent on discussing what I > assume is not just the minted patch but safety/security in

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 04:11:42PM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: > > The first thing we will remember about your handling of this discussion > is your commitment of rationality. Please do not let Enrico's new > attacks affect you. I have really no words able to correctly describe you. -- Enrico

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Le 01/08/2017 à 10:50, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:07:11PM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: I am sure that Scott meant to include in some way the option that I have been advocating constantly from the beginning, which I understand is probably 1. (Otherwise, I do not see what

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:05:19AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > I expected the point about a second vote being unfair, but since I did not > consider the first vote fair (due to my poor structuring of the options), I > chose to do a second vote. I must add that your fairness was lacking well

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Agreed too. I will add that we should not neglect the harm we are inflicting to our smallish team by making people increasingly pissed off at each other. Security is important, but bikeshedding has a cost, and I am not sure that we can afford it. We have to take into account that the minted

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:05:19AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > I am going to take the advice of the senior developers and to cancel the > second vote. Dear Scott, you can try to remove the nail but the hole remains. > we can of course decide to remove something before the final release.

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am 01.08.2017 9:24 nachm. schrieb "Richard post-beta1 vote, we may decide to remove it. It's obviously up to you, Scott, as release manager, but I agree with Enrico, to some extent, that this isn't the best policy. We have spent an enormous amount of time on this and finally have come to some

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Christian Ridderström wrote: > On 1 August 2017 at 01:25, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > Would you mind pointing me to that post? I don't know if I simply missed it > or was unable to read/consider/reply at the time. I can, but would you mind start using some reasonable technical

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 11:15:23AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Richard Heck wrote: > > It's obviously up to you, Scott, as release manager, but I agree with > > Enrico, > > to some extent, that this isn't the best policy. We have spent an enormous > > amount of time on this and finally have come

Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

Scott Kostyshak wrote: > Ah I did not realize you did that on purpose. I actually found it annoying > when > I wanted to go up the discussion and couldn't because it was cut off +1 Pavel

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Richard Heck wrote: > It's obviously up to you, Scott, as release manager, but I agree with Enrico, > to some extent, that this isn't the best policy. We have spent an enormous > amount of time on this and finally have come to some kind of resolution. It > really would be best to close that part

Re: Discussing minted/safety/etc (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 01:00:47AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > Hmm, and perhaps in case of votes, Scott should (be allowed to) weigh them > differently depending on the persons knowledge. E.g., since I don't > know/understand the (intended) safety design, why should my vote count as >

Re: Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 12:20:24AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > Richard wrote: > > > We have spent an enormous amount of time on this ... > > > > HI, > > Regarding the discussion of LyX's safety I'd like to make a few remarks > related to ... ?list etiquette? Not sure what the correct

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 01:13:14AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > On 1 August 2017 at 21:24, Richard Heck wrote: > > > On 08/01/2017 04:54 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > >> Pavel Sanda wrote: > > >>> I did

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 03:24:48PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > On 08/01/2017 04:54 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > >> Pavel Sanda wrote: > >>> I did not hear your reaction to it either. > >> I see you just did that, sorry... P > > I

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 1 August 2017 at 21:24, Richard Heck wrote: > On 08/01/2017 04:54 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > >> Pavel Sanda wrote: > >>> I did not hear your reaction to it either. > >> I see you just did that, sorry... P > > I

Discussing minted/safety/etc (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

Richard wrote: > We have spent an enormous amount of time on this ... > Hi, Some thoughts regarding the discussion of safety and design of security measures, i.e. a kind of "lessons learned" regarding the discussion aspects. I think one thing that made things slower and more inefficient was a

Long threads? / list etiquette? (Was: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue)

Richard wrote: > We have spent an enormous amount of time on this ... > HI, Regarding the discussion of LyX's safety I'd like to make a few remarks related to ... ?list etiquette? Not sure what the correct term should be, but it ought to be clear below. Really long threads: Are we really ok

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 1 August 2017 at 01:25, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Christian Ridderström wrote: > > Please note that I'm _not_ wholly against something like needauth, I'm > simply > > not convinced it's good enough. In fact, I'm still unclear on exactly > how it > > currently works, or perhaps

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 08/01/2017 04:54 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: >> Pavel Sanda wrote: >>> I did not hear your reaction to it either. >> I see you just did that, sorry... P > I believe that except for Enrico and I, everyone who participated in > this

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 04:54:05AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > So to be clear: although we are going to release beta1 with minted > support, depending on the post-beta1 vote, we may decide to remove it. Sorry, but this is not fair. The option to remove support has been just voted and it

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Dienstag, 1. August 2017 um 11:10:09, schrieb Stephan Witt > Am 01.08.2017 um 10:54 schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > > > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > >> Pavel Sanda wrote: > >>> I did not hear your reaction to it either. > >>

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 11:10:09AM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: > Am 01.08.2017 um 10:54 schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > > > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > >> Pavel Sanda wrote: > >>> I did not hear your reaction to it either. > >> > >> I see you

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am 01.08.2017 um 10:54 schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: >> Pavel Sanda wrote: >>> I did not hear your reaction to it either. >> >> I see you just did that, sorry... P > > I believe that except for Enrico and I, everyone

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:43:04AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > Corrected at 44babaf6. Thanks, that works well. The only other comment I have is to possibly instruct the user to reconfigure after installing the module. If I recall, that's what we say in similar contexts. Scott

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:35:27AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Pavel Sanda wrote: > > I did not hear your reaction to it either. > > I see you just did that, sorry... P I believe that except for Enrico and I, everyone who participated in this conversation has voted. Uwe was interested in voting,

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 12:34:56AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > So I think a very important question is if we think needauth is > sufficiently good, > or can be made sufficiently good before release. My opinion is that yes. > IMHO it's for LyX 2.3 not ok to do a release that's unsafe

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:07:11PM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: > I am sure that Scott meant to include in some way the option that I have > been advocating constantly from the beginning, which I understand is > probably 1. (Otherwise, I do not see what the option 1. refers to nor > who proposed

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Pavel Sanda wrote: > I did not hear your reaction to it either. I see you just did that, sorry... P

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Christian Ridderström wrote: > Please note that I'm _not_ wholly against something like needauth, I'm simply > not convinced it's good enough. In fact, I'm still unclear on exactly how it > currently works, or perhaps rather, how it's intended to work in LyX 2.3. I already wrote you possible

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Hi Scott, On 31 July 2017 at 16:50, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > I'm concerned that since this issue has left us all exhausted, there is > > a feeling of "let's just get this over so we can move on". I encourage > > all of us to give one more cognitive spurt

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:07:11PM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: > > I am sure that Scott meant to include in some way the option that I have > been advocating constantly from the beginning, which I understand is > probably 1. (Otherwise, I do not see what the option 1. refers to nor > who proposed

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Le 31/07/2017 à 13:00, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:01:39PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:57:01AM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: A key point to me is that, according to your other message, going with 3. locks 2.3 into implementing Pygments

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Scott Kostyshak wrote: > I'm concerned that since this issue has left us all exhausted, there is > a feeling of "let's just get this over so we can move on". I encourage > all of us to give one more cognitive spurt and give a vote. > > From what I understand, the three options are still what I

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Montag, 31. Juli 2017 um 12:51:15, schrieb Enrico Forestieri > On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:27:02PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote: > > > > Testing the patch shell-escape-auth-5.diff, there is 1 issue from my side: > > The session entry is totally ignored if using 'lyx -E', therefore

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:01:39PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:57:01AM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: > > > A key point to me is that, according to your other message, going with > > 3. locks 2.3 into implementing Pygments using minted. For this reason > > and that

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:27:02PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote: > > Testing the patch shell-escape-auth-5.diff, there is 1 issue from my side: > The session entry is totally ignored if using 'lyx -E', therefore I'd prefer > to save the entries in some other file (for instance

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:57:01AM +0200, Guillaume MM wrote: > A key point to me is that, according to your other message, going with > 3. locks 2.3 into implementing Pygments using minted. For this reason > and that it does not solve fundamental issues, there are more reasonable > solutions

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Le 31/07/2017 à 10:57, Guillaume MM a écrit : I spotted various areas of improvement: ... * The new buffer param and the boolean argument in the session file are superfluous and make the code much more complicated than needed. ... I now understand better that this is by design, but it

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 11:01:18PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 07:51:08PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > If I remove the python-pygments module (and reconfigure) and test, I get > > the following error: > > > > The driver command necessary to use the

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Le 29/07/2017 à 23:57, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: On 07/20/2017 01:21 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Am Mittwoch, den 19.07.2017, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: The attached patch takes into account all of these ideas. As a

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Sonntag, 30. Juli 2017 um 23:15:53, schrieb Enrico Forestieri > On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:27:02PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote: > > > > Testing the patch shell-escape-auth-5.diff, there is 1 issue from my side: > > The session entry is totally ignored if using 'lyx -E',

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

The latest version of Enrico's patches look good to me. R On 07/29/2017 05:57 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: >> On 07/20/2017 01:21 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: >>> Am Mittwoch, den 19.07.2017, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:27:02PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote: > > Testing the patch shell-escape-auth-5.diff, there is 1 issue from my side: > The session entry is totally ignored if using 'lyx -E', therefore I'd prefer > to save the entries in some other file (for instance

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 07:51:08PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > If I remove the python-pygments module (and reconfigure) and test, I get > the following error: > > The driver command necessary to use the minted package > (pygmentize) has not been found. Make sure you have > the

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Freitag, 28. Juli 2017 um 23:31:42, schrieb Enrico Forestieri > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:16:15PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > I am also investigating the possibility of attaching a context menu to > > the red icon in the status bar. > > This is now done in the

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am 30.07.2017 11:54 vorm. schrieb "Jean-Marc Lasgouttes" : FWIW, I am on vacation without a computer right now. I did not test Enrico's patch, but I agree that this is the right direction. So applying it cannot hurt, and will allow us to move forward, not only wrt next

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

FWIW, I am on vacation without a computer right now. I did not test Enrico's patch, but I agree that this is the right direction. So applying it cannot hurt, and will allow us to move forward, not only wrt next release, but also on this issue. JMarc Le 29 juillet 2017 23:57:52 GMT+02:00,

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 07:51:08PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 05:48:46PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:31:42PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:16:15PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > > > > I am

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 05:48:46PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:31:42PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:16:15PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > > I am also investigating the possibility of attaching a context menu to > > > the

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Samstag, 29. Juli 2017 um 17:57:52, schrieb Scott Kostyshak > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > On 07/20/2017 01:21 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, den 19.07.2017, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > > >> The attached

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Samstag, 29. Juli 2017 um 17:48:46, schrieb Scott Kostyshak > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:31:42PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:16:15PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > > I am also investigating the possibility of attaching a context

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > On 07/20/2017 01:21 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 19.07.2017, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > >> The attached patch takes into account all of these ideas. As a > >> disclaimer, > >> note that I am

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 02:03:52AM +0200, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote: > 3) I liked to propose addition of support for running Gnuplot scripts as > well, with the corresponding converter tagged as a 'needauth' one > [ this last feature cannot be tagged as a security enhancement, (clarifying, in

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:31:42PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:16:15PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > I am also investigating the possibility of attaching a context menu to > > the red icon in the status bar. > > This is now done in the attached patch.

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 17/07/2017 15:18, Enrico Forestieri wrote: I don't understand if the 'needauth' is new in LyX 2.3.0 or already existed. This is new to 2.3.0 and is instead deemed a security improvement. Yes, security is improved by allowing running dangerous converters. I have to step in for a

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 09:16:15PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > I am also investigating the possibility of attaching a context menu to > the red icon in the status bar. This is now done in the attached patch. Hovering with the mouse over the red icon a warning is shown, and right clicking

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 11:11:36AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > It did feel strange that the "OK" and "Apply" buttons were not enabled > > when checking the "Allow running external programs" checkbox, but I got > > used to it quickly. > > Likely not feature but just

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:05:42PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > I think the following is unexpected: > > Change a different document setting, e.g., "Synchronize with output". > The buttons "OK" and "Apply" are enabled. Then click on "Allow running > external programs". Notice that the "OK"

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Scott Kostyshak wrote: > It did feel strange that the "OK" and "Apply" buttons were not enabled > when checking the "Allow running external programs" checkbox, but I got > used to it quickly. Likely not feature but just forgotten connect with signal of box being checked. P

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 05:49:33PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > > > I propose to apply this patch and return to productivity. > > > > I would agree with that. > > It seems this patch has some support. I will do some testing

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > I propose to apply this patch and return to productivity. > > I would agree with that. It seems this patch has some support. I will do some testing and give my thoughts soon. I'm still traveling but will be back and start having

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:49:05AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: Hi Christian, I did not respond to your other questions since I've been traveling, and others have done so in the mean time. Let me know if some of your questions have gone unanswered. > As an aside, I've used org-mode

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 07/20/2017 01:21 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 19.07.2017, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: >> The attached patch takes into account all of these ideas. As a >> disclaimer, >> note that I am providing it only because I am now familiar with this >> part >> of the code

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Mittwoch, den 19.07.2017, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Enrico Forestieri: > The attached patch takes into account all of these ideas. As a > disclaimer, > note that I am providing it only because I am now familiar with this > part > of the code and can quickly come up with a patch. But I am not >

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 07/19/2017 02:04 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:58:44AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: >> Thanks for this, Enrico. Let me just ask one question about it: Is the >> mechanism here per-document >> or per-document and also per-converter? > This only addresses particular

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:58:44AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > Thanks for this, Enrico. Let me just ask one question about it: Is the > mechanism here per-document > or per-document and also per-converter? This only addresses particular converters, i.e., the latex backends. > That is,

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 07/19/2017 10:37 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 07:26:23PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: >> On 07/18/2017 09:56 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: >>> Am Dienstag, den 18.07.2017, 15:39 +0200 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: Whi, not, maybe along with the names of the

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 07:26:23PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > On 07/18/2017 09:56 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > Am Dienstag, den 18.07.2017, 15:39 +0200 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: > >> Whi, not, maybe along with the names of the converters (features) > >> Sweave/gnuplot/minted present in

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

> > But I'd make one more suggestion: Every time a user opens a > document for which this > sort of thing will be enabled, we pop a warning before we do anything. > I.e., we do NOT just run > gnuplot in the background, but we say something like what Jürgen had > above, with buttons offering >

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On 07/18/2017 09:56 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 18.07.2017, 15:39 +0200 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: >> Whi, not, maybe along with the names of the converters (features) >> Sweave/gnuplot/minted present in current document and accepted by the >> user. > I would add a verbose

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 05:03:52PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > After reading all the thread now, would you call the position below > hypocritical? > > 1. I do not like needauth mechanism much, but I don't see better way how to >allow advanced users to work with knitr/gnuplot without too

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Pavel Sanda wrote: >b) have minted & needauth, but drop it once we can (and I would propose .. by "it" I mean needauth .. > > Pavel

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 01:28:38PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:57:24PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote: > > > > you have good and valid arguments. But don't you see how insulting some > > > > of > > > > your mails

Re: Options for resolving the minted + shell-escape issue

Am Dienstag, den 18.07.2017, 15:39 +0200 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: > Whi, not, maybe along with the names of the converters (features) > Sweave/gnuplot/minted present in current document and accepted by the > user. I would add a verbose tooltip when hovering the icon, something like '''

  1   2   >