Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Joost Verburg > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | > sure it does. I do this all the time with emacs and firefox. > | > | Firefox has only a single process for all windows. > | > | In LyX you can have right now: > | > | 1) Multiple LyX instances (different processes) > | 2) Multiple windows per instance > | 3) Multiple documents per window > | > | 2) and 3) share the same data, but 1) does not. Do you really expect > | the users to know which windows belong to which instance? > > as a matter of fact, yes I do. > > I would have liked us to have some better control over files that > might have changed on disk though. (And this is a problem we have > regardless of only one lyx instance or not.)
And solving that problem is far better than artificially restricting LyX IMHO for two reasons: - This "intelligent" stuff usually strikes back - It will solve another serious problem: I edit a .lyx file on disk with my text editor to do some fancy search/replace, and accidentally overwrite it later with the old version that was still loaded in LyX. In fact the solution of this problem is very easy: Remember the last write time fo the file, and check it again before saving. If the two times differ, ask the user what to do. I really hate applications that think they know better what I want to do. If I open two LyX instances I have a reason to do so, and LyX should not override that decision. Georg
