New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
Hello, The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? -- Álvaro Tejero Cantero p42.org
Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Alvaro Tejero Cantero wrote: Hello, The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? No. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. And a very yummy omelette it is too. We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Anyway. It's not broken. The format has changed that's all. This is deliberate. We have never guaranteed that the LyX format will never change. We have however guaranteed that your old files will be read by a newer version (up to a point -- then you need an intermediate version to convert really old files to a newer format). Allan. (ARRae)
Fwd: Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? | No. | We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. | Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Yes. Perhaps I was too concise. I simply wanted to know, I was not criticizing the policy (to which indeed I agree!). So excuse me if my message sounded harsh. Best, -- Álvaro Tejero Cantero p42.org
Re: Fwd: Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Alvaro Tejero Cantero wrote: The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? | No. | We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. | Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Yes. Perhaps I was too concise. I simply wanted to know, I was not criticizing the policy (to which indeed I agree!). So excuse me if my message sounded harsh. It's 3:32am here and I'm just a little tired so please excuse my long winded reply. Allan. (ARRae)
New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
Hello, The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? -- Álvaro Tejero Cantero p42.org
Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Alvaro Tejero Cantero wrote: Hello, The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? No. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. And a very yummy omelette it is too. We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Anyway. It's not broken. The format has changed that's all. This is deliberate. We have never guaranteed that the LyX format will never change. We have however guaranteed that your old files will be read by a newer version (up to a point -- then you need an intermediate version to convert really old files to a newer format). Allan. (ARRae)
Fwd: Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? | No. | We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. | Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Yes. Perhaps I was too concise. I simply wanted to know, I was not criticizing the policy (to which indeed I agree!). So excuse me if my message sounded harsh. Best, -- Álvaro Tejero Cantero p42.org
Re: Fwd: Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Alvaro Tejero Cantero wrote: The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with =1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? | No. | We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. | Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Yes. Perhaps I was too concise. I simply wanted to know, I was not criticizing the policy (to which indeed I agree!). So excuse me if my message sounded harsh. It's 3:32am here and I'm just a little tired so please excuse my long winded reply. Allan. (ARRae)
New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
Hello, The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with <=1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? -- Álvaro Tejero Cantero p42.org
Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Alvaro Tejero Cantero wrote: > Hello, > > The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read with > <=1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be fixed? No. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. And a very yummy omelette it is too. We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Anyway. It's not broken. The format has changed that's all. This is deliberate. We have never guaranteed that the LyX format will never change. We have however guaranteed that your old files will be read by a newer version (up to a point -- then you need an intermediate version to convert really old files to a newer format). Allan. (ARRae)
Fwd: Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
> > The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read > with <=1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be > fixed? | No. | We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. | Or vice versa depending on your perspective. Yes. Perhaps I was too concise. I simply wanted to know, I was not criticizing the policy (to which indeed I agree!). So excuse me if my message sounded harsh. Best, -- Álvaro Tejero Cantero p42.org
Re: Fwd: Re: New tabular inset in 1.1.6cvs
On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Alvaro Tejero Cantero wrote: > > > > > The new tabular inset format produces tables that cannot be read > > with <=1.1.4. (I didn't test with 1.1.5). Is that going to be > > fixed? > > | No. > > | We don't guarantee upward-compatibility only backward-compatibility. > | Or vice versa depending on your perspective. > > Yes. Perhaps I was too concise. I simply wanted to know, I was not > criticizing the policy (to which indeed I agree!). So excuse me if my > message sounded harsh. It's 3:32am here and I'm just a little tired so please excuse my long winded reply. Allan. (ARRae)
