I'm going to promote this issue into leo-editor itself because not
everyone subscribes to Leo's bug reports.
Here is the actual bug page, containing the initial bug report and my
comments:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/leo-editor/+bug/893223
Excerpts
===
1. The report:
Leo-editor
On Nov 23, 5:21 am, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
This bug has the real possibility of turning into a worthy bug. Let me
review what I know for sure, or thereabouts...
I didn't mention the last piece of the puzzle: saving the file cures
the problem, because I don't see how that
Had a long chat with my brother Speed yesterday. He said he's been
using 4.9 final. I told him that was ancient code :-)
He said he was confused by the link to 4.9 final on Leo's home page:
it prevented him from using the daily builds. Actually, I convinced
him to start using Leo's bzr branch.
On Nov 23, 9:06 am, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
One technical problem remains: I'd like bzr pushes to ensure that the
version number in leoVersion.py matches the latest revision. Does
anyone know sure to do that cleanly?
Suppose I create a bzr hook for the push command. The
How about maintaining a second link to the last release older than,
say, 3 months ago? Label it something like And for those who avoid
using current releases on the principle that they aren't
battle-hardened, the following release is the most recent one older
than 3 months:
Plus a link to
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
How about maintaining a second link to the last release older than,
say, 3 months ago? Label it something like And for those who avoid
using current releases on the principle that they aren't
battle-hardened, the
Hi all,
As I said several times, I'm increasingly living more and more in Leo
(seeing things like command shell integration thread seem that I could
be immerse in Leo even more). I need for that reason the ability to
create some @file nodes on some places that need root permisions,
without
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Largo84 larg...@gmail.com wrote:
Suppose my focus node is under a @path directive, say @path E:
\Documents\Some Folder\
Is there a setting that would cause the 'FileOpen' or 'FileImport
File' commands to begin the search dialog in the directory, E:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 03:21:18 -0800 (PST)
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
Presumably, this means the call to::
val = command(event)
in c.doCommand has never returned. Otherwise, it appears inevitable
that c.inCommand would be set False, thereby disabling the message.
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 03:21:18 -0800 (PST)
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
Presumably, this means the call to::
val = command(event)
in c.doCommand has never returned. Otherwise, it appears inevitable
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:14:53 -0600
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com
wrote:
How about maintaining a second link to the last release older than,
say, 3 months ago? Label it something like And for those who avoid
I would think that dynamic would be true only if you didn't have many
people using the application and reporting bugs. That may be the case
(as in not many actually reporting bugs), but the point is that
that's the dynamic that those who wait on official releases have in
mind. Many people won't
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:27:00 -0600
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
It won't help unless we can reproduce the bug. We can't do that now,
which is why we need theory.
Ok - I guess I missed the bug's not reproducible. Can the OP reproduce
it? Do we have the list of plugins active in
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
That doesn't work: simply being 3 months old is no guarantee of having
fewer bugs than the trunk. It's a guarantee of having more bugs than
the trunk.
Having access to a three month old build, which can be done
The proposition is about a PR approach. You advertise the latest and
greatest and say Leo is on the bleeding edge, but you add one link
labeled as I suggested (And for those who avoid using current
releases on the principle that they aren't battle-hardened, the
following release is the most
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:40:17 -0500
Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
The proposition is about a PR approach. You advertise the latest and
greatest and say Leo is on the bleeding edge, but you add one link
labeled as I suggested (And for those who avoid using current
releases on
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:40:17 -0500
Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
The proposition is about a PR approach. You advertise the latest and
greatest and say Leo is on the bleeding edge, but you add one link
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it be possible to add 1 week, 1 month and 3 month
snapshots to your snapshots page?
There already is a 10 day snapshot, so all need would be the 1 and 3
month snapshots.
EKR
--
You received this message
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
Ok - I guess I missed the bug's not reproducible. Can the OP reproduce
it? Do we have the list of plugins active in the reporting environment?
Thanks for reminding me about plugins. This might well be a bug in a
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
I think there's a more critical element, the in emergency break glass
aspect. If someone overwrites their only copy of bleeding edge working
Leo with bleeding edge broken (for their particular use case) Leo, an
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
Ok - I guess I missed the bug's not reproducible. Can the OP reproduce
it? Do we have the list of plugins active in the reporting
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
I think there's a more critical element, the in emergency break glass
aspect. If someone overwrites their only copy of bleeding edge working
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:59:21 -0600
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
So, are we all agree that adding a few older emergency snapshots is
all the is needed?
I'm adding 30 and 90 day old snapshots...
Cheers -Terry
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:05 AM, Zoom.Quiet zoom.qu...@gmail.com wrote:
as atta. snaps:
- as default pane size,font in find pane can not display well
- unless drag up find pane make all words display...
- but font in pane is not same as others, it look like bigger
- and the new viersion
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:59:21 -0600
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
So, are we all agree that adding a few older emergency snapshots is
all the is needed?
I'm adding 30 and 90 day old snapshots...
Thanks.
Making stable releases is important, even if we wanted to encourage using
latest snapshots. A project that has no releases is not taken seriously by
prospective new users, certainly not by folks looking into using the sw in
mission critical capacity
On Nov 23, 2011 5:06 PM, Edward K. Ream
I think Leo should have stable releases. It's important to many
people, and some of these reasons have already been mentioned. Perhaps
the real reason 4.9 is ancient is that there is too much friction in
the process of generating and packaging stable releases.
-matt
--
You received this message
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:22:49 +0200
Ville M. Vainio vivai...@gmail.com wrote:
Making stable releases is important, even if we wanted to encourage using
latest snapshots. A project that has no releases is not taken seriously by
prospective new users, certainly not by folks looking into using the
Hi,
On 11/23/11 13:32, Matt Wilkie wrote:
I think Leo should have stable releases. It's important to many
people, and some of these reasons have already been mentioned. Perhaps
the real reason 4.9 is ancient is that there is too much friction in
the process of generating and packaging stable
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
off...@riseup.net wrote:
May be we can have a rolling release model a la Arch Gnu/Linux. Yuo just
download the version of some date and that's it. No six months forced
update like in Ubuntu. In that model with 10 30 and 90 days you
I'm a new user. Let this be an introduction of who I am and what I
want to do with Leo. I'll also give some early observations, and
advertise for help.
I'm Ted Goranson. I've managed research in government labs, and am
working on a personal project. I have a computer science degree from
MIT, but
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:55:43 -0800 (PST)
tedg t...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
A side observation: you'd have many more users if the installation
were more straightforward or better documented. Moving to Bazaar is a
step away from that. (I'm talking here about non-core Python
programmers.)
Using bzr
Speed had a great suggestion: rather than saying something like
stable releases suck, the home page should say something completely
positive, like, Leo is the leading edge, and that's all there is.
Get it here. :-)
This makes sense for a certain audience comfortable with version
control
33 matches
Mail list logo
