On Tuesday 27 August 2002 10:32, Andre Poenitz wrote: > > I would reduce the actual _users_ of 1.3 by a factor of two if I did that > I suppose...
Sorry but I don't understand why. All that I am saying is if you have a 1.2 document then save it with 1.2.x, if you have a 1.3cvs then save it with 1.3cvs, why would this halve the 1.3 users? > > Take as an example the \end_deeper problem that we had last week, how > > would you be able to revert to the old format? > > It tried to eat just one doc of mine with only a few enumerations. I fixed > this manually. That was my point. ;-) > > My concern with lyx2lyx is the end user, so I don't care about cvs > > version. > > End users have the same problem. 1.2 and 1.1.5 do not works together very > well. Believe me, the convertion would the same size, or greater, than the one we have now. > > Then the read-only flag is the solution. But I repeat, I don't > > understand why someone that is using an editing a lyx document with some > > version doesn't expect lyx to save with the respective file format... > > Because I cannot send version 220 .lyx files to people using 1.1.5. > Currently we have the Word 2/95/2000 mess. lyx2lyx is fixing this nicely Then we should design the file format to help the process, not as we have it now. > (Thanks again btw), but only in one direction.... > > Andre' -- Jos� Ab�lio
