Rob Lahaye wrote:
Aaah, I see.
Yes, I do remember vague a problem like this, when I was reducing
the height of all widgets from 30 to 20; 20 was too small, so it
became 25. The latter seemed to work for all of us.
(I haven't done all dialogs yet, some are still at 30 pix style).
So the 25
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 10:26:03AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What will happen, in reality, is that a handful of users will build linked
binaries and distribute them to others. Some of this may fall within the
dubious inside-the-same-organization GPL exemption, but most will not.
You
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 06:41:43PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As you say below, users on the Windows platform building binaries
linked to the QT non-commercial windows toolkit, and distributing them,
will be breaking the LyX GPL license.
You are right, but the critical point is
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 09:55:51AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, there certainly have been major improvements in the source code,
lots of clean up, etc. The GUII effort, as you call it.
But you'd be hard pressed to offer a host of significant new features,
from the user's
On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 10:02:33AM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
Andre Poenitz wrote:
And how does calling BufferView through FuncRequest (through/passing
BufferView again) leads to cleaner code as opposed to calling it
directly?
*shrug*
Perhaps it doesn't.
And what's your
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:37:59AM +0900, Rob Lahaye wrote:
Yes, I do remember vague a problem like this, when I was reducing
the height of all widgets from 30 to 20; 20 was too small, so it
became 25. The latter seemed to work for all of us.
Aerm... did I mention the preamble dialog is _far_
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:58:46AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are
handled.
Couldn't we settle for a flat 'lyx' namespace?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have,
nor do they
John Levon wrote:
perhaps unsurprisingly i am all for it
Me too.
I'm with Edwin and John for the practical reasons Edwin already pointed out.
It might sound egoistic, but a native win port would just make my life much
easier.
So if you change your mind and need my ok you'll
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:58:46AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are
| handled.
|
| Couldn't we settle for a flat 'lyx' namespace?
I'd really, really rather not.
Once we have all
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:23:19AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:58:46AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are
| handled.
|
| Couldn't we settle for
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:37:59AM +0900, Rob Lahaye wrote:
Yes, I do remember vague a problem like this, when I was reducing
the height of all widgets from 30 to 20; 20 was too small, so it
became 25. The latter seemed to work for all of us.
Aerm... did I mention the
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:23:19AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| | On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:58:46AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| | This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms
Michael Schmitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| I would also like to see some native Windows port. With xforms and
| X-Window, we will never penetrate the Window world.
Has that ever been a goal?
| I would also like to see one site (i.e. www.lyx.org) that provides
| binaries for all platforms
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:37:36AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| lyx::InsetCode would do for me personally.
with lyx::insets::Code you could use just Code in a lot of places.
I know.
But even if I am a big fan of short names in the short range, I find them
confusing on a long distance,
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:37:31PM +0900, Rob Lahaye wrote:
But to your preamble problem:
I still don't understand why you have such problems with simply
stretching up the preamble dialog in the direction you need
(longer lines and/or more lines).
I can, but this takes time.
Why is resizing
larry == larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
larry The problem here is not with the GPL, but with the Trolltech
larry business model and licensing practices, which puts open source
larry applications under the GPL in this untenable position if
larry developers wish to release Windows versions.
Michael == Michael Schmitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael I would also like to see some native Windows port. With
Michael xforms and X-Window, we will never penetrate the Window
Michael world.
Of course it would be nice. But I tend to think (after some
hesitation) that we should just stick
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:09:11AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
That is how this discussion started. However, there is little point in
hosting Ruurd's source and binaries if we do not want to distribute
these binaries. Of course, if the goal changed to having a Qt/X11
binary for windows,
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:17:49AM +0200, Andre' Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:09:11AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
That is how this discussion started. However, there is little point in
hosting Ruurd's source and binaries if we do not want to distribute
these binaries. Of
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that
your approach mixes at least two different concepts which should be
separated:
I. Insets that show/hide parts of the document
- i.e. Branch, Comment, Note, Greyedout
- Can contain very large contents up to a complete
No known problems.
[John, that should make you start...]
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have,
nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
Index: lyxtext.h
Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think we should distribute the source, but not the binaries.
Andre ... of the 'native' version I mean.
Well, distributing the sources of the native version without the
binaries is really hypocritical, I think. If these source do not have
any
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:53:54AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think we should distribute the source, but not the binaries.
Andre ... of the 'native' version I mean.
Well, distributing the sources of the native version without the
Ronald == Ronald Florence [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ronald On Sunday, July 6, 2003, at 08:18 AM, John Levon wrote:
A user has pointed out that the LyX (Qt/MacOSX) port to the Aqua
interface crashes abruptly if the Navigate menu is clicked while
viewing the Tutoral. I confirmed the bug.
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
- it seems that I cannot get reconfigure to work, but since I cannot
see the console output, I do not know what is wrong. Do you know how
it is possible to get this output? Running configure by hand from
the .lyx directory works, however.
On my OSX, there is
Michael Schmitt wrote:
I am a bit confused. I thought we agreed that each branch/note inset
should have two properties that correspond to I. and II. above. That
means, in the document dialog, you can both activate/deactive an inset
_and_ define its position (or, more general, its appearance)
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:05:23AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
That's really bad.
No, I think this is just a new superficial mess completely independent of
'real' internal changes. However, as this can be rectified by editing
lib/ui/default.ui with a simple text editor before releasing
Ruurd == Ruurd Reitsma [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ruurd Anyway, there's also scenario:
Ruurd d) Create a Win32 X11 Qt lib from the GPL'ed free edition. Use
Ruurd that for development distribution. Let the user add the
Ruurd 'win32 window system' Qt library.
Ruurd How does that sound?
I think
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 12:46:22PM +0100, Ruurd Reitsma wrote:
I think there are only three clean solutions:
(a) Provide detailed instruction how to build LyX/Qt on Windows, but do
not distibute prebuild binaries. No need to ask contributors for
that.
(b) Choose a new
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:40:25AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
No known problems.
[John, that should make you start...]
Can you please wait until at least Wednesday ...
regards
john
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:54:31AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
| This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are
| handled.
|
| Why this sudden fad for making the code harder to read for no apparent
| purpose ??
*plonk*
??
Maybe you want the question recast:
Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andre How do you add some 'win32 window system library' without
Andre linking LyX? I.e. what's the benefit over 'just giving sources
Andre and compile instructions'? (Legally, it sound ok to me...)
Qt/X11 for win32 is GPL.
JMarc
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 12:56:42PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:05:23AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
That's really bad.
No, I think this is just a new superficial mess completely independent of
'real' internal changes. However, as this can be rectified by
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:32:44AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
| On an ideal world, I don't see the point of the lyx:: namespace.
except when used to protect against our own pollution of the global
namespace.
For example ? When the LyX code has some clients maybe, but until then
we
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:04:55PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andre How do you add some 'win32 window system library' without
Andre linking LyX? I.e. what's the benefit over 'just giving sources
Andre and compile instructions'?
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:11:01PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
Your constant (*far* too late) whining about this is starting to annoy
me, I must admit.
Good.
OK, then I shall ignore you entirely on this topic. Especially as you
are too lazy to do the groundwork to argue your case.
john
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:18:31PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:11:01PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
Your constant (*far* too late) whining about this is starting to annoy
me, I must admit.
Good.
OK, then I shall ignore you entirely on this topic.
I guess
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Contrary to the 'mathed font change nightmare', there seem to be users
| (other than myself) complaining about the seemingly randomly shifted menu
| items. If you check you might see a coincidence of most of my whining with
| some user complaining about
Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andre On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:04:55PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre wrote:
Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andre How do you add some 'win32 window system library' without
Andre linking LyX? I.e. what's the benefit over
Entirely wasting my time, but ...
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:33:10PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
I guess you'd hear me as soon anybody tries to _release_ 1.4.0 like this.
Are you seriously stating you'll veto this ? AFAIK you don't have this
right over the menus.
Especially as you are too
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:48:02PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Andre Ok, but if some user want to 'change the library' he'd need to
Andre re-link LyX, doesn't he? And that would mean at least a working
Andre linker, which is less than a full-blown compiler + autotool +
Andre ..., but
Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andre On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:48:02PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre wrote: Ok, but if some user want to 'change the library' he'd
Andre need to re-link LyX, doesn't he? And that would mean at least a
Andre working linker, which is less than
Jean-Marc == Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jean-Marc Yes, I noticed the problem this week end and I know what
Jean-Marc the problem is. I will try to send you an alternative patch
Jean-Marc today. Other things that I noticed:
Can you try the following alternative patch? It does
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:49:06PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
Entirely wasting my time, but ...
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:33:10PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
I guess you'd hear me as soon anybody tries to _release_ 1.4.0 like this.
Are you seriously stating you'll veto this ? AFAIK you
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:57:31PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Andre I thought Ruurd offered (d) as a clean way for us but with less
Andre hassle for the user than in the other 'clean' solution. I was
Andre just trying to say that the hassle for the user is not much
Andre less than to
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 12:23:01PM +0200, Andre Poenitz spake thusly:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:53:54AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
...
However, if it appears that Ruurd's code can help building a Mingw/X11
version of LyX (which would be lighter than a cygwin version and
better
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:04:14AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
larry I was rather shrill about the QT effort, in particular. In
larry light of Trolltech's dual support for Unix and Windows, the QT
larry frontend has always seemed destined to run aground on precisely
larry this issue
I am just trying to debug the crash with the qt submenu and keyboards with the
help of Trolltech, who cannot (yet) reproduce the crash, though.
Just to exclude some weirdness on my system, can some of you who also see the
crash try to reproduce it with the attached example app?
You have to
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
I can reproduce the crash with the example on any except the second item of
the menu. E.g. Alt+M--Alt+b--Right Arrow crashes, while
Alt+M--Alt+u--Right Arrow does not.
And the reason is, obviously, the duplicated shortcut of that item (S_u_bmenu2
vs. Submen_u_7).
So let's hope that there will be qt-3.1.3 soon...
Juergen
-- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --
Subject: Re: [Issue N25747] qt 3.1.2 submenu crash
Date: Montag, 7. Juli 2003 16:53
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Juergen
Now I can reproduce it.
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:15:08AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
[...] is bad because people might break the rules?
Any situation that predictibly makes violations of the GPL into standard
practice is, indeed, bad. That's an indictment of Troll Tech's practices, not
LyX or QT development by
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:37:45AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
So what you are actually proposing is that the current developers or
whoever distributes LyX (including Kayvan, the Linux distributors etc)
take some legal risk just for the benefit of a random Windows user that's
neither able to
--- Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andre I thought Ruurd offered (d) as a clean way for us but with less
Andre hassle for the user than in the other 'clean' solution. I was
Andre just trying to say that the hassle for the user is not much
Andre less than to let him compile and
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| There is consensus amongst everybody except you. That includes Lars and
| JMarc.
If consensus include I can live with it, then ok.
--
Lgb
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:05:23AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
Because LyX without the 'GUII effort' and further cleanups is in a state
where adding new features is very difficult. Moreover, even if adding a
new feature turns out to be possible it most likely adds to the current
mess and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| I've heard the canard of feature bloat from some.
|
| I'd take a few more menu items over boatloads of Evil Red Text any day.
I think you are now fudding all over the place.
--
Lgb
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:33:10PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
I've been using LyX for six years now, and I find
- Layout - Document
- Layout - Paragraph
- Layout - Character
very logical now.
Interestingly, over my many years of using LyX, I've watched other word
processing
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| I am also a bit wary as I did exactly the same thing about three years
| ago (I could check CVS for specific dates) in my day time job project - and
| undid it shortly afterwards. So this was a complete waste of time.
Let me waste some more time then,
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:32:44AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
|
| | On an ideal world, I don't see the point of the lyx:: namespace.
|
| except when used to protect against our own pollution of the global
| namespace.
|
| For example ? When the
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:49:06PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
Fundamental changes sometimes cause problems during periods of
transition. This does not necessarily imply the change is bad.
Of course not.
But as an infrequent observer over a period of years, it's really striking to
see that in
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:49:55PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
| For example ? When the LyX code has some clients maybe, but until then
| we have only to deal with the platform's namespace
Note that lyx is also its own client.
This is true. But have we had any real namespace problems
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 03:05:42PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
Certainly not. But not shouting 'veto' does not mean it is unhearable.
Your objection has been noted, I said acerbically ;)
There are technical reasons for the change. Again, you're too lazy to
actually argue the points from
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:51:56AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been using LyX for six years now, and I find
- Layout - Document
- Layout - Paragraph
- Layout - Character
very logical now.
Interestingly, over my many years of using LyX, I've watched other word
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:31:28AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:15:08AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
[...] is bad because people might break the rules?
Any situation that predictibly makes violations of the GPL into standard
practice is, indeed, bad. That's
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:45:42PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
I think you are now fudding all over the place.
What I find most remarkable about this discussion, Lars, is the emails I've
received from sympathetic readers who don't want to have to deal with the
ramifications of posting
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:18:29AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've always wanted the best for LyX. I'm sorry that certain participants
around here say, basically, that it's not worth their time to respond with any
substance, then suggest there is no substance to the discussion (LOL) ...
Huang Ying [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| The patch contains the the main form, ie the LyXView and Aboutlyx
| dialog. Just a begining with gtk frontend. The render system is based on
| xft including the math things. So making sure that you have configure
| the math xft font properly. I think I have
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:58:45PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
The patch contains the the main form, ie the LyXView and Aboutlyx
dialog. Just a begining with gtk frontend. The render system is based on
xft including the math things. So making sure that you have configure
the math xft font
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:45:42PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| I think you are now fudding all over the place.
|
| What I find most remarkable about this discussion, Lars, is the emails I've
| received from sympathetic readers who don't want to have to deal
Huang Ying wrote:
The Advice is welcome.
This is a minor issue, but I think the *.glade files should go rather to
frontends/gtk/dialogs than to lib/glade (all frontend specific stuff should
be in /frontends AFAIK).
Regards,
Juergen.
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:10:54AM -0700, Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote:
Do you have any examples? Be as specific as you can.
Kayvan, I returned to evaluate whether to jump back into the LyX effort over a
period of weeks and months (as I said in one of my first postings in 2003).
Those focused on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juergen Spitzmueller) writes:
| Huang Ying wrote:
| The Advice is welcome.
|
| This is a minor issue, but I think the *.glade files should go rather to
| frontends/gtk/dialogs than to lib/glade (all frontend specific stuff should
| be in /frontends AFAIK).
Depends a bit...
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:15:21AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
pursue their agenda. Maybe, finally, time was ripe to reinvigorate some of the
ambitions I've encountered around the world for LyX software, documented partly
in the LyX mailing lists, but perhaps more in some archived private
ERT can play an important role in creating templates, allowing for insertion of
raw LaTeX at key points throughout a document.
However, for inexperienced users using a template, it may be important that
items of LaTeX be locked, so they may not be casually erased.
In fact, I would find this
Attached is the final version of my Note/Branch inset work. It
works, has a decent UI and is I think cleanly coded (in Pascal-style
C++ :-).
Of course there are always things to improve; opening/closing all
insets of a given branch is still lacking, and the UI for the set of
all branches is a
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:40:45AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, for inexperienced users using a template, it may be important that
items of LaTeX be locked, so they may not be casually erased.
Having this as an option in the .layout files sound OK.
But I don't like the idea of
First bug: nested Note/Branch insets don't work properly, the right
mouse click always goes to the outermost one.
Fix: limit the effect of button 3 to the inset's button area.
Patch replacement file attached.
- Martin
--
Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Helsinki University of Technology
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:06:27PM +0100, John Levon spake thusly:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:40:45AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, for inexperienced users using a template, it may be important that
items of LaTeX be locked, so they may not be casually erased.
Having this
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:06:27PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:40:45AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, for inexperienced users using a template, it may be important that
items of LaTeX be locked, so they may not be casually erased.
But I don't like the
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:18:21AM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
Therefore an alternative proposal: what about introducing an inset --
we could call it InsetProtected -- that protects everything inside it
from deletion? A little easier to code on the document level. And the
thing remains
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 06:32:54PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
You have so far provided a lot of statements about the development of
lyx and the lack of new features, about what has been done to the code
and not, and what we have lost because of the drive for GUII.
I've certainly said
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:10:54PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
Some content from Larry ! :)
Very funny, John.
Any permutation is a distribution of some kind. This change in
particular reflects the general move to an object-verb interface instead
of a verb-object interface. Menus in general
What do you propose be done if someone builds and posts binaries somewhere
else? Which is inevitable.
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 12:23:01PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
Well, distributing the sources of the native version without the
binaries is really hypocritical, I think. If these source
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 06:32:54PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| You have so far provided a lot of statements about the development of
| lyx and the lack of new features, about what has been done to the code
| and not, and what we have lost because of the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:10:54PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
|
| Some content from Larry ! :)
|
| Very funny, John.
|
| Any permutation is a distribution of some kind. This change in
| particular reflects the general move to an object-verb interface instead
| of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| But at least it removes the canned text (along with ERT widgets) from view.
It seems to me that a feature like this only have meaning for some
ERTs.
ERTs that is part of a paragraph _must_ be deleted if the paragraph as
a whole is deleted.
ERTs that is a
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:12:40AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
And _who_ are you to tell people what they should use their spare time
on?
Put up or shut up, you are really beginning to annoy me now.
Making fundamental UI changes, for functions that have been around for
what, six or
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:19:03AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
ERTs that is part of a paragraph _must_ be deleted if the paragraph as
a whole is deleted.
ERTs that is a paragraph of its own might need to be locked.
Well, I suppose one could disqualify deletion of a block of text is a
Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Attached is the final version of my Note/Branch inset work. It
| works, has a decent UI and is I think cleanly coded (in Pascal-style
| C++ :-).
|
| Of course there are always things to improve; opening/closing all
| insets of a given branch is still
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:19:03AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| ERTs that is part of a paragraph _must_ be deleted if the paragraph as
| a whole is deleted.
|
| ERTs that is a paragraph of its own might need to be locked.
|
| Well, I suppose one could
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:12:40AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| And _who_ are you to tell people what they should use their spare time
| on?
|
| Put up or shut up, you are really beginning to annoy me now.
|
| Making fundamental UI changes, for
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:45:24AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
And there are two things here:
- locking the contents of the instet from alteration
- making the inset be indeletable.
I have sympathy with the first one, I have problems with the second
one.
From the
Editing text, if you insert hit a space at the end of a word (with other
words already typed after it), then cntrl-right arrow to jump forward one word,
then you are left with 2x blank spaces in the text which persist.
I imagine this is buggy behavior.
I just tried it out, and it seems to work fine for me. However I am
really bad at finding problems with stuff like this.
You really need to get others than me to test this. John is good and
finding problems...
--
Lgb
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:18:21AM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
Therefore an alternative proposal: what about introducing an inset --
we could call it InsetProtected -- that protects everything inside it
from deletion? A little easier to code on the document level. And the
From a code point
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:51:52AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
I have no problems with the changes John has made, even if I am not
quite familiar with them yet. (Not having recent documents at end of
the file menu was a problem...)
I'm still a little split over my change here. On the
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 01:55:53AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
I just tried it out, and it seems to work fine for me. However I am
really bad at finding problems with stuff like this.
You really need to get others than me to test this. John is good and
finding problems...
24 hours or
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 04:55:25PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Editing text, if you insert hit a space at the end of a word (with other
words already typed after it), then cntrl-right arrow to jump forward one word,
then you are left with 2x blank spaces in the text which persist.
I
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:01:03PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I don't like the idea of representing it on the UI level for insets
in general - what is wrong with using Undo, Revert, etc. if you
accidentally delete something important ?
As I mentioned in the quoted text, casual
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| [1] Can I have my yearly toldyouso ?
No. This is never helpful and tends to put people in the trenches.
--
Lgb
1 - 100 of 220 matches
Mail list logo
