Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Georg Baum]

Pavel Sanda wrote:

 Georg Baum wrote:
 a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and
 index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at
 
 BTW how often this dataloss happens - only if index inset is present?
 (I ask whether immediate 2.1.(0.)1 release is needed or we can wait
 weeks...)

The invalid headers happen for all documents with the standard math package 
settings. The data loss happens only if an index or label inset is present 
(maybe there are other insets of this kind, but index and label are the ones 
which occur several times in our own docs).

I don't think that an immediate action for 2.1.x is needed - I guess the 
2.1.1 release will be quite soon anyway. The situation with 2.0.x is 
different - we won't produce any further release there, and it is especially 
adverstised to be able to read 2.1 files.


Georg

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Georg Baum
georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de wrote:

 The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I
 believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would
 have found the problems.

Do you have an idea for implementing these tests? It's not hard to
create a bash script if you are on 2.1.x, that checks out the document
files from master branch and replaces lib/{doc,template,examples}.
Then the normal ctest should work. In fact I was planning to do this
for the lyx-tester script I use. But that is a bit messy and relies on
Git and I'm not sure it belongs in LyX's repo.

Scott

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

Op 27 apr. 2014 21:22 schreef Scott Kostyshak skost...@lyx.org:

 On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Georg Baum
 georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de wrote:

  The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I
  believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would
  have found the problems.

 Do you have an idea for implementing these tests? It's not hard to
 create a bash script if you are on 2.1.x, that checks out the document
 files from master branch and replaces lib/{doc,template,examples}.
 Then the normal ctest should work. In fact I was planning to do this
 for the lyx-tester script I use. But that is a bit messy and relies on
 Git and I'm not sure it belongs in LyX's repo.

 Scott

The first problem is that the lyx2lyx code seems not always be tested by
the writer himself nor critically reviewed by anyone else. Not so long ago
we found a huge error in lyx2lyx that would corrupt any document that was
slightly more real-life than a minimal example. The code was completely
wrong and anyone could have seen that.

Especially the lyx2lyx code could be tested by unit tests. Each
convert/revert function should be accompanied by tests.

Vincent

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Georg Baum]

Pavel Sanda wrote:

> Georg Baum wrote:
>> a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and
>> index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at
> 
> BTW how often this dataloss happens - only if index inset is present?
> (I ask whether immediate 2.1.(0.)1 release is needed or we can wait
> weeks...)

The invalid headers happen for all documents with the standard math package 
settings. The data loss happens only if an index or label inset is present 
(maybe there are other insets of this kind, but index and label are the ones 
which occur several times in our own docs).

I don't think that an immediate action for 2.1.x is needed - I guess the 
2.1.1 release will be quite soon anyway. The situation with 2.0.x is 
different - we won't produce any further release there, and it is especially 
adverstised to be able to read 2.1 files.


Georg

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Georg Baum
 wrote:

> The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I
> believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would
> have found the problems.

Do you have an idea for implementing these tests? It's not hard to
create a bash script if you are on 2.1.x, that checks out the document
files from master branch and replaces lib/{doc,template,examples}.
Then the normal ctest should work. In fact I was planning to do this
for the lyx-tester script I use. But that is a bit messy and relies on
Git and I'm not sure it belongs in LyX's repo.

Scott

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Vincent van Ravesteijn]

Op 27 apr. 2014 21:22 schreef "Scott Kostyshak" :
>
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Georg Baum
>  wrote:
>
> > The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I
> > believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would
> > have found the problems.
>
> Do you have an idea for implementing these tests? It's not hard to
> create a bash script if you are on 2.1.x, that checks out the document
> files from master branch and replaces lib/{doc,template,examples}.
> Then the normal ctest should work. In fact I was planning to do this
> for the lyx-tester script I use. But that is a bit messy and relies on
> Git and I'm not sure it belongs in LyX's repo.
>
> Scott

The first problem is that the lyx2lyx code seems not always be tested by
the writer himself nor critically reviewed by anyone else. Not so long ago
we found a huge error in lyx2lyx that would corrupt any document that was
slightly more real-life than a minimal example. The code was completely
wrong and anyone could have seen that.

Especially the lyx2lyx code could be tested by unit tests. Each
convert/revert function should be accompanied by tests.

Vincent

severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Georg Baum]

I am sorry that this comes so late, but I found severe problems in lyx2lyx 
which occur for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion while testing my fix for bug #9069. 
If you do the roundtrip 2.0 = 2.1 = 2.0 for the 2.0.8 user guide, you get 
a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and 
index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/2fe07e1fe1e/lyxgit and 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/5710f68c340/lyxgit.

What to do now? These fixes as well as 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/cacd2a041d2/lyxgit and 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/52d25886131/lyxgit should go to 2.1.1. 
Richard, is this OK?

I also think that the final 2.0.x release should have them. I know that 
this would create much additional work, since 2.0.8 is already tagged and  
packaged (and therefore can't be changed anymore), but I don't think that 
it is acceptable to tell people that it can read 2.1 files if in fact 
these files will not be converted correctly in most cases.

The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I 
believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would 
have found the problems.


Georg

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Richard Heck]

On 04/25/2014 05:05 PM, Georg Baum wrote:

I am sorry that this comes so late, but I found severe problems in lyx2lyx
which occur for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion while testing my fix for bug #9069.
If you do the roundtrip 2.0 = 2.1 = 2.0 for the 2.0.8 user guide, you get
a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and
index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/2fe07e1fe1e/lyxgit and
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/5710f68c340/lyxgit.

What to do now? These fixes as well as
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/cacd2a041d2/lyxgit and
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/52d25886131/lyxgit should go to 2.1.1.
Richard, is this OK?


Yes, those look good.


I also think that the final 2.0.x release should have them. I know that
this would create much additional work, since 2.0.8 is already tagged and
packaged (and therefore can't be changed anymore), but I don't think that
it is acceptable to tell people that it can read 2.1 files if in fact
these files will not be converted correctly in most cases.


I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it 
shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?



The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I
believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would
have found the problems.


That would be a good idea.

Richard

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Pavel Sanda]

Richard Heck wrote:
 I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it 
 shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?

We should have 2.0.8.1 (or 2.0.9), 2.0.8 packages are already in the wild.
Pavel

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Richard Heck]

On 04/25/2014 06:48 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:

Richard Heck wrote:

I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it
shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?

We should have 2.0.8.1 (or 2.0.9), 2.0.8 packages are already in the wild.


Yes, that's true.

rh

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Pavel Sanda]

Richard Heck wrote:
 On 04/25/2014 06:48 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
 Richard Heck wrote:
 I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it
 shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?
 We should have 2.0.8.1 (or 2.0.9), 2.0.8 packages are already in the wild.

 Yes, that's true.

If the question was whether we should repackage at all then I think yes as 
well. P

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 = 2.0 conversion

[Pavel Sanda]

Georg Baum wrote:
 a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and 
 index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at 

BTW how often this dataloss happens - only if index inset is present?
(I ask whether immediate 2.1.(0.)1 release is needed or we can wait weeks...)

Pavel

severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Georg Baum]

I am sorry that this comes so late, but I found severe problems in lyx2lyx 
which occur for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion while testing my fix for bug #9069. 
If you do the roundtrip 2.0 => 2.1 => 2.0 for the 2.0.8 user guide, you get 
a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and 
index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/2fe07e1fe1e/lyxgit and 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/5710f68c340/lyxgit.

What to do now? These fixes as well as 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/cacd2a041d2/lyxgit and 
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/52d25886131/lyxgit should go to 2.1.1. 
Richard, is this OK?

I also think that the final 2.0.x release should have them. I know that 
this would create much additional work, since 2.0.8 is already tagged and  
packaged (and therefore can't be changed anymore), but I don't think that 
it is acceptable to tell people that it can read 2.1 files if in fact 
these files will not be converted correctly in most cases.

The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I 
believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would 
have found the problems.


Georg

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Richard Heck]

On 04/25/2014 05:05 PM, Georg Baum wrote:

I am sorry that this comes so late, but I found severe problems in lyx2lyx
which occur for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion while testing my fix for bug #9069.
If you do the roundtrip 2.0 => 2.1 => 2.0 for the 2.0.8 user guide, you get
a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and
index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/2fe07e1fe1e/lyxgit and
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/5710f68c340/lyxgit.

What to do now? These fixes as well as
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/cacd2a041d2/lyxgit and
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/52d25886131/lyxgit should go to 2.1.1.
Richard, is this OK?


Yes, those look good.


I also think that the final 2.0.x release should have them. I know that
this would create much additional work, since 2.0.8 is already tagged and
packaged (and therefore can't be changed anymore), but I don't think that
it is acceptable to tell people that it can read 2.1 files if in fact
these files will not be converted correctly in most cases.


I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it 
shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?



The question is of course how to avoid such bugs in the future, and I
believe that we need automated lyx2lyx roundtrip tests: Such tests would
have found the problems.


That would be a good idea.

Richard

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Pavel Sanda]

Richard Heck wrote:
> I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it 
> shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?

We should have 2.0.8.1 (or 2.0.9), 2.0.8 packages are already in the wild.
Pavel

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Richard Heck]

On 04/25/2014 06:48 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:

Richard Heck wrote:

I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it
shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?

We should have 2.0.8.1 (or 2.0.9), 2.0.8 packages are already in the wild.


Yes, that's true.

rh

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Pavel Sanda]

Richard Heck wrote:
> On 04/25/2014 06:48 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>> Richard Heck wrote:
>>> I'm inclined to agree. It would mean re-packaging for everyone, but it
>>> shouldn't be too bad. Other opinions?
>> We should have 2.0.8.1 (or 2.0.9), 2.0.8 packages are already in the wild.
>
> Yes, that's true.

If the question was whether we should repackage at all then I think yes as 
well. P

Re: severe lyx2lyx problem for 2.1 => 2.0 conversion

[Pavel Sanda]

Georg Baum wrote:
> a document with invalid header settings and data loss where argument and 
> index insets are mixed. I fixed these two problems at 

BTW how often this dataloss happens - only if index inset is present?
(I ask whether immediate 2.1.(0.)1 release is needed or we can wait weeks...)

Pavel