Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| At the moment it seems that everyone, without exception, is frustrated by the
| current deadlock.
I'll try to explain why am am just not releasing 1.4.0 right away: I
continue to see small dribble of work that obviously some people deem
very important
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Angus Is it just me, or does the LyX icon here look rubbish?
Angus http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/53215
Angus Especially when it's compared to Martin's and Jean-Marc's
Angus rather swizzy
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| At the moment it seems that everyone, without exception, is frustrated
| by the current deadlock.
I'll try to explain why am am just not releasing 1.4.0 right away: I
continue to see small dribble of work that obviously
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Angus, I did removed the for_each methods but I let the inner class
| iterator and const_iterator because they could be useful in the future.
| Beside that they provide already operator+=. I am still open
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 13:30 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
I'll try to explain why am am just not releasing 1.4.0 right away: I
continue to see small dribble of work that obviously some people deem
very important for a release.
I believe that this is a big misunderstanding: People do
Daniel Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Hi list,
| Another query relating to my ebuild work. The creator of the last ebuild
| (for 1.4.0pre3) has set Qt up as a compile-time dependency only but has
| left a note saying he is unsure if this is accurate. Does LyX 1.4.0pre5
| (and we're assuming
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 16:01 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| 2251 (well understood and tested)
But only cosmetic. I do not understand why it cannot wait.
Sure it is not so important, but I do not understand why it should wait.
What do you expect to
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 04:01:14PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
| 1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
|
| John targetted some bugs to 1.4.0 recently. Of these,
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
Due to the fact that everybody has a different opinion on what must be
included in 1.4.0, I would like to propose a different approach:
1.
Here's what I am seeing. Any ideas?
make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
make PCH_FLAGS= pch-file
make[5]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
Hi list,
More ebuild stuff (though, having discovered the lack of an ebuild for the
most recent stable LyX version, I've switched from 1.4.0pre5 to 1.3.7).
When I first install LyX, Edit Preferences File Formats has no entries
under programs. I then used Edit Reconfigure, which did fill in some
I wrote:
I then used Edit Reconfigure...
Sorry to reply to my own message, but is there a way of just running a LyX
reconfigure from the command line (that'll exit immediate after the
reconfig)? I'd like to add it to the post-install section of the ebuild, to
get LyX operational faster.
Dan
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 18:02 schrieb Daniel Watkins:
Sorry to reply to my own message, but is there a way of just running a
LyX
reconfigure from the command line (that'll exit immediate after the
reconfig)? I'd like to add it to the post-install section of the ebuild,
to
get LyX
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 18:32 schrieb Daniel Watkins:
I've never really looked at RPM spec files before, so I am a little
confused. I (think I) know %{name} refers to the package name (i.e. LyX)
but can't figure out what directory %{_datadir} referring to. I'd
appreciate it if someone
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 04:06:59PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I'm afraid this would need some changes to CutAndPaste.C because there
is a problem with the local c-like static variable theCuts. Apparently
the limited_stack class does not work well with my version of
ParagraphList: it
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 06:16:56PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes a écrit :
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
Andre == Andre Poenitz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Is it to say that you will not allow the changes I've planned in my
TODO list about ParagrahList in th 1.5svn
Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| | Anyway, I attached again the last unchanged patch and the new
| | it_vector.h header. Jean-Marc, if you could test this after 1.4.0,
| | I think it could be a good candidate for 1.4.1.
|
| I must admit that I'd prefere
Kayvan A. Sylvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Here's what I am seeing. Any ideas?
|
| make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
| make PCH_FLAGS= pch-file
| make[5]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
| g++
Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| The important point is that we should NOT discuss on the IMPORTANCE of
| a patch. We are wasting energy this way. Let's discuss the patches
| themselves.
The patches themselves (if they are correct) are not important, it
_is_ what they fix and and the
Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
| 1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
|
| All the change tracking stuff should go in. It can't get worse.
Which part of the CT feature is
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 08:53:34PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
| 1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
|
| All the change
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| At the moment it seems that everyone, without exception, is frustrated by the
| current deadlock.
I'll try to explain why am am just not releasing 1.4.0 right away: I
continue to see small dribble of work that obviously some people deem
very important
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> writes:
>
> Angus> Is it just me, or does the LyX icon here look rubbish?
> Angus> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/53215
>
> Angus> Especially when it's compared to Martin's and Jean-Marc's
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | At the moment it seems that everyone, without exception, is frustrated
> | by the current deadlock.
>
> I'll try to explain why am am just not releasing 1.4.0 right away: I
> continue to see small dribble of work that
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > Angus, I did removed the "for_each" methods but I let the inner class
| > iterator and const_iterator because they could be useful in the future.
| > Beside that they provide already "operator+=". I am
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 13:30 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> I'll try to explain why am am just not releasing 1.4.0 right away: I
> continue to see small dribble of work that obviously some people deem
> very important for a release.
I believe that this is a big misunderstanding: People do
Daniel Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hi list,
| Another query relating to my ebuild work. The creator of the last ebuild
| (for 1.4.0pre3) has set Qt up as a compile-time dependency only but has
| left a note saying he is unsure if this is accurate. Does LyX 1.4.0pre5
| (and we're
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 16:01 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | 2251 (well understood and tested)
>
> But only cosmetic. I do not understand why it cannot wait.
Sure it is not so important, but I do not understand why it should wait.
What do you
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 04:01:14PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
> | > 1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
> |
> | John targetted some bugs to 1.4.0 recently.
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
Due to the fact that everybody has a different opinion on what must be
included in 1.4.0, I would like to propose a different approach:
1.
Here's what I am seeing. Any ideas?
make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
make PCH_FLAGS= pch-file
make[5]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
Hi list,
More ebuild stuff (though, having discovered the lack of an ebuild for the
most recent stable LyX version, I've switched from 1.4.0pre5 to 1.3.7).
When I first install LyX, Edit > Preferences > File Formats has no entries
under programs. I then used Edit > Reconfigure, which did fill in
I wrote:
> I then used Edit > Reconfigure...
Sorry to reply to my own message, but is there a way of just running a LyX
reconfigure from the command line (that'll exit immediate after the
reconfig)? I'd like to add it to the post-install section of the ebuild, to
get LyX operational faster.
Dan
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 18:02 schrieb Daniel Watkins:
> Sorry to reply to my own message, but is there a way of just running a
LyX
> reconfigure from the command line (that'll exit immediate after the
> reconfig)? I'd like to add it to the post-install section of the ebuild,
to
> get LyX
Am Sonntag, 19. Februar 2006 18:32 schrieb Daniel Watkins:
> I've never really looked at RPM spec files before, so I am a little
> confused. I (think I) know %{name} refers to the package name (i.e. LyX)
> but can't figure out what directory %{_datadir} referring to. I'd
> appreciate it if someone
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 04:06:59PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> I'm afraid this would need some changes to "CutAndPaste.C" because there
> is a problem with the local c-like static variable theCuts. Apparently
> the limited_stack class does not work well with my version of
> ParagraphList:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 06:16:56PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes a écrit :
> >Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
> >>>"Andre" == Andre Poenitz
> >>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>writes:
> >>
> Is it to say that you will not allow the changes I've planned in my
>
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| >| Anyway, I attached again the last unchanged patch and the new
| >| "it_vector.h" header. Jean-Marc, if you could test this after 1.4.0,
| >| I think it could be a good candidate for 1.4.1.
| >
| >I must admit that I'd
"Kayvan A. Sylvan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Here's what I am seeing. Any ideas?
|
| make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
| make PCH_FLAGS= pch-file
| make[5]: Entering directory
`/home/kayvan/src/lyx/qtbuild/boost/libs/filesystem/src'
| g++
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| The important point is that we should NOT discuss on the IMPORTANCE of
| a patch. We are wasting energy this way. Let's discuss the patches
| themselves.
The patches themselves (if they are correct) are not important, it
_is_ what they fix and and the
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| >Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
| >1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
| >
| All the change tracking stuff should go in. It can't get worse.
Which part of the CT
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 08:53:34PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> |
> | >Developer, if you have _anyting_ that you feel _must_ be included in
> | >1.4.0, the time is to state so now, loud and clear.
> | >
> | All
42 matches
Mail list logo
