>>>>> "Asger" == Asger K Alstrup Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Asger> [I wrote about LyX document virus]
>> That's an interesting idea. This would happen if we allow the
>> documents themselves to contain macros. I think that this is a bad
>> idea at this point of time.
Asger> Yes, but I think we want to aim for this, and therefor, we
Asger> should consider this now.
We'll see.
>> In fact, I'd like us to improve the lyx server and use it
>> temporarily as macro support. In fact, I am not sure that we will
>> have time to implement a macro language (that works in an useful
>> way) and put it to actual use for next major release. We already
>> have a lot of major things to do.
Asger> Ok, so we have agreed that scripting is a version 1.1 issue.
You seem very determined on this case, aren't you? ;)
Asger> We should handle security practically the same way as browsers
Asger> do it with Java: If the program is not "certified", the access
Asger> to all system features is disabled.
Asger> In essence, this means that the scripts will not be allowed to
Asger> open anything but LyX documents (and other format we can
Asger> import) that the script knows the specific filename for, and
Asger> that the script will not be allowed to write anything except
Asger> LyX documents (and other formats we export). Also, the script
Asger> will not be allowed to overwrite a file without the user having
Asger> the option to cancel.
Hmm, this is very ambitious (and very interesting indeed). Couldn't we
finish this GUI independence stuff?
>> Do you fear that I run away with all the money?
Asger> No, it's just that you are too valuable to loose. (sob, sob)
Since we are on no-smiley-day, I hesitate whether this is a compliment
or a vicious attack. I'll assume the former, because I am a nice guy.
JMarc
