On 04/15/2010 12:07 PM, Typhoon wrote:
If it isn't necessary, I don't think that LyX should lock into one

While it is good to support a wide choice of systems for version
control, for a "portable LyX document" *one* format is the right way.

I see the argument, and you may be right. BUT when I wanted to
collaborate with a colleague, they knew how to use Bazaar, so we went
that way. I think it would have been hard to get them to use something

I think you are missing something and it's probably my fault. The idea of a portable document using a git repo is somewhat perpendicular to how many DVCS systems are supported by LyX. The idea behind a "portable LyX document" is that the user doesn't know which SCM he uses as LyX would take care of everything. So having your coauthor fluent in bazar rather than git is irrelevant.

As I said before, I don't know what the technical problems are in
implementing this in LyX. However, if it is possible to support more
than one DVCS, then I think it should be kept in mind. The "portable"
in "portable LyX document" is a very relative thing. It depends almost
entirely on who you want to "port" it to.

I suppose that if everything is bundled with LyX, then the choice is
made and it doesn't matter. Is that a sensible solution?

In the end, I suppose that it may be a technical question/solution and
I am absolutely unqualified to speak to that. But I hope that people
who are qualified will at least consider keeping the options open.

Sure, don't worry :-)


Reply via email to