yes i remember the thread. you unfortunately took too long hiatus and Vincent disappeared meanwhile... ;)
I'm not disappeared.. ;) and this was still on my todo list. I didn't forget about it. There just always seems other things that need to be done too :(.
I'll be somewhat more visibly back in two weeks from now. I'll see what the progress is until then and I'll have a look how I can finish it if there is still work to do.
I would like to have another go at fixing this bad interaction between track changes and version control systems. Basically means using a hash function of author email (+/- name) rather than an integer starting at 1 to identify the author of tracked changes. But I need a little help with practicalities 1) I have a patch set for 1.6.X which will no longer apply because Vincent (vfr) already contributed an alternative. I presume that I need to modify my patch to layer on top of his.
If I remember correctly, I didn't commit an alternative, but just half the solution. I need to look back at your patch and mine to remember the details.
2) Is there a developer style guide posted anywhere? My code is algorithmically correct to the best of my knowledge, but I don't do a lot of C++/Qt and this was my first patch offered for LyX so a lot of the comments on my code were style issues.
There is a document in the svn-tree, in development/coding. In practice, you might better have a look at the rest of the code and use the same coding style.
3) How should lyx2lyx be handled in this case? I guess I need to layer a conversion from vfr's patch (format 369) to my proposal. Or if that file format was never a stable release can it be ignored?
Yes, I think it can be ignored if you really change the format a lot. Just rewrite the format. You only need to be careful that there is no later file format that uses the format I introduced, but I doubt that is the case.
Many thanks for your help, Greg Jefferis.
Vincent
