On 31.03.08, William R. Buckley wrote: > Well, the open source tool Maxima has no problem following a Windows > shortcut in its browsing function. So, your position is therefore that > LyX should be less than it might be, when other open source tools have > no problem with a simple if arcane function.
The stated position was that this is either problem of the underlying QT library or Windows itself. It is a LyX well considered design decision to "delegate" the OS interface functions to QT. Creating a workaround in LyX or using a different widget library was ruled out as too much work or not appropriate for a not so important issue in a function that should be handled by the supporting library without extra efforts. In this sense the bug can be classified as "wontfix" or "works for me". > The proper ideal for any open source tool should be operating > system universality, ... There was a suggestion to report the bug to "where it belongs", i.e. the QT library. QT is actively supported, tries to do the "operating system universality" in a clean and sensible way. Maybe this bug is even fixed in a current version of QT (or labelled as wontfix even there if the Windows version that exhibits the bug is rarely used). In this sense it can be classified as "reassign to QT". > What really surprises me is the effort various members have > expended to encourage me not to help your project. Please be patient with the developers that sometimes feel hurt if LyX is blamed for something that is not their fault. Ignoring these parts of the response helps to keep traffic on this list on a reasonable level. Contacting the QT people might be the best idea if you want your help to find the right adressee (as this bug might affect a lot of other applications that use QT as well). MfG Guenter
