Re: FancyLineEdit.h not found (Lucid

On 24-6-2011 7:41, John McCabe-Dansted wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:36 PM, John McCabe-Dansted gma...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:20 PM, John McCabe-Dansted gma...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry, for some reason this got sent as I was typing. Anyway this is with

Re: FancyLineEdit.h not found (Lucid

Am 24.06.2011 um 07:41 schrieb John McCabe-Dansted: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:36 PM, John McCabe-Dansted gma...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:20 PM, John McCabe-Dansted gma...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry, for some reason this got sent as I was typing. Anyway this is with

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: We will have at least two ppas - namely lyx-daily for daily builds of trunc please make sure in some description that _trunk_ is not what users want unless they really know what they are doing. pavel

Re: FancyLineEdit.h not found (Lucid

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Stephan Witt st.w...@gmx.net wrote: I've build LyX-2.0.1 successfully with Qt-4.6.3 on macosx from svn branch checkout. Did you apply some backport patch locally? No, but I switched from trunk; svnversion reported a incomplete switch. I ran svn switch again,

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org wrote: Rainer M Krug wrote: We will have at least two ppas - namely lyx-daily for daily builds of trunc please make sure in some description that _trunk_ is not what users want unless they really know what they are doing.

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: lyx-daily lyx-stable and lyx-beta The latter should be called lyx-unstable unless it is a real beta release. Jürgen

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller sp...@lyx.org wrote: Rainer M Krug wrote: lyx-daily lyx-stable and lyx-beta The latter should be called lyx-unstable unless it is a real beta release. I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it right),

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it right), so: lyx-daily daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and only for testing purposes -- unstable lyx-beta official released beta versions of lyx. can be considered -- quite

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 11:23, Rainer M Krug a écrit : I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it right), so: lyx-daily daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and *only* for testing purposes -- unstable I would differentiate the wording for branch. The daily

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Rainer M Krug r.m.k...@gmail.com wrote: there should always be a installation candidate lyx in the stable ppa, which effectively is always the newest version and installs as lyx without any version suffix. Would that then clash with the official Ubuntu(tm) LyX

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lasgout...@lyx.orgwrote: Le 24/06/2011 11:23, Rainer M Krug a écrit : I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it right), so: lyx-daily daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and *only* for

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: --- BRANCH_2_0_X (unstable but usable) As JMarc already noted, that's not true. Apart from expeptions that actually should not happen (but can happen even in official stable releases), BRANCH_2_0_X is usually even more stable than our official stable releases. Jürgen

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 11:52, Rainer M Krug a écrit : Ok. I think this all biols down to the understanding of how stable trunk and BRANCH_2_0_X is. So the first question is: Which binaries do we want to have in ppas? and We/you obviously have to decide what ppas are really useful (do adding new ones

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Sorry - forgot the reply all On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Rainer M Krug r.m.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller sp...@lyx.orgwrote: Rainer M Krug wrote: --- BRANCH_2_0_X (unstable but usable) As JMarc already noted, that's not true. Apart from

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lasgout...@lyx.orgwrote: Le 24/06/2011 11:52, Rainer M Krug a écrit : Ok. I think this all biols down to the understanding of how stable trunk and BRANCH_2_0_X is. So the first question is: Which binaries do we want to have in ppas?

external material template: SVG - PDF/PS with LaTeX

Hi, I wrote a template and conversion scripts for importing Inkscape SVG graphics as PDFTEX or PSTEX as external material in LyX. It works analog to the FIG template and its scripts. You will need Inkscape 0.48. It can save the SVG image as a PDF or EPS file and place the text in a LaTeX file

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 12:22, Rainer M Krug a écrit : I think one ppa should only hold the official final releases, with version suffixes, and one lyx, which updates the ubuntu one. This should be the one for the user who really want's to be on the save side. One other ppa should have the opposite -

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lasgout...@lyx.orgwrote: Le 24/06/2011 12:22, Rainer M Krug a écrit : I think one ppa should only hold the official final releases, with version suffixes, and one lyx, which updates the ubuntu one. This should be the one for the user

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 14:26, Rainer M Krug a écrit : In this scheme we would be mixing releases with daily builds, which I think is not a good idea. Also: a beta tester might not be interested in the daily builds. Especially, I would not mix the daily trunk builds with anything else more stable - if

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lasgout...@lyx.orgwrote: Le 24/06/2011 14:26, Rainer M Krug a écrit : In this scheme we would be mixing releases with daily builds, which I think is not a good idea. Also: a beta tester might not be interested in the daily builds.

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 15:34, Rainer M Krug a écrit : My problem is to separate two kind of users: * people who want a version of lyx safe with their documents (lyx releases, branch daily builds). This is the ppa we can recommend to everybody. OK - if the developers feel comfortable

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

To chip in.. On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lasgout...@lyx.org wrote: Concerning naming, I would propose an explicit separation between daily and releases with names like lyx-daily-(stable|trunk) This naming scheme seems most intuitive for daily builds. For most

RE: #7647: Punctuation keys treated as dead keys

Thanks very much for the fast reply and suggestions. Because this problem occurs only with LyX and not elsewhere, I wonder whether LyX somehow misinterprets my settings. It *used* to work properly, but in the middle of editing a document the key mapping suddenly changed. I did nothing prior

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On 06/24/2011 05:38 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 24/06/2011 11:23, Rainer M Krug a écrit : I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it right), so: lyx-daily daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and *only* for testing purposes -- unstable I

Informative diff between po files versions

Hello, I wanted to find what were the recent changes I submitted to a po file. Alas, the diff is not informative because the true changes are masked by a lot of noise (modified comment lines, identical message lines rewritten differently, etc.). Is there a tool which makes a real diff by

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: I just think that a beta tester (even an alpha tester) is not nearly as adventurous as a daily build trunk user. So if we are talking about types of users, I would possibly add the trunc user as a third category which would mean a third ppa. to be frank, except

Re: Informative diff between po files versions

Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: Hello, I wanted to find what were the recent changes I submitted to a po file. Alas, the diff is not informative because the true changes are masked by a lot of noise (modified comment lines, identical message lines rewritten differently, etc.). Is there a

Possible change to LaTeX export

Dear LyX developers, First of all, I would like to express my gratitude for the development of LyX. It has sped up my scientific typesetting by a factor of 2-3. I have a possible suggestion for the LaTeX export code. I've noticed that the filenames in figures are exported without their

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org wrote: Rainer M Krug wrote: I just think that a beta tester (even an alpha tester) is not nearly as adventurous as a daily build trunk user. So if we are talking about types of users, I would possibly add the trunc user as a third

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Liviu Andronic landronim...@gmail.com wrote: In my view release is extraneous here. We could have instead: lyx-1.6 (for latest stable 1.6.x release; probably forever 1.6.10) lyx (for latest stable release, currently 2.0.0 and soon 2.0.1, while in the future it

Re: FancyLineEdit.h not found (Lucid

On 24-6-2011 7:41, John McCabe-Dansted wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:36 PM, John McCabe-Dansted > wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:20 PM, John McCabe-Dansted >> wrote: >>> Sorry, for some reason this got sent as I was typing. >>> >>> Anyway this is

Re: FancyLineEdit.h not found (Lucid

Am 24.06.2011 um 07:41 schrieb John McCabe-Dansted: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:36 PM, John McCabe-Dansted > wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:20 PM, John McCabe-Dansted >> wrote: >>> Sorry, for some reason this got sent as I was typing. >>> >>>

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: > We will have at least two ppas - namely lyx-daily for daily builds of trunc please make sure in some description that _trunk_ is not what users want unless they really know what they are doing. pavel

Re: FancyLineEdit.h not found (Lucid

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Stephan Witt wrote: > I've build LyX-2.0.1 successfully with Qt-4.6.3 on macosx from svn branch > checkout. > Did you apply some backport patch locally? No, but I switched from trunk; svnversion reported a incomplete switch. I ran svn switch

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Rainer M Krug wrote: > > We will have at least two ppas - namely lyx-daily for daily builds of > trunc > > please make sure in some description that _trunk_ is not what users want > unless they really know what they are doing.

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: > lyx-daily > lyx-stable > > and > > lyx-beta The latter should be called lyx-unstable unless it is a real beta release. Jürgen

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Rainer M Krug wrote: > > lyx-daily > > lyx-stable > > > > and > > > > lyx-beta > > The latter should be called lyx-unstable unless it is a real beta release. > I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: > I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it right), > so: > > lyx-daily > daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and only for > testing purposes -- unstable > > lyx-beta > official released beta versions of lyx. can be considered

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 11:23, Rainer M Krug a écrit : I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it right), so: lyx-daily daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and *only* for testing purposes -- unstable I would differentiate the wording for branch. The daily

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Rainer M Krug wrote: > there should always be a installation candidate "lyx" in the stable ppa, > which effectively is always the newest version and installs as lyx without > any version suffix. Would that then clash with the official

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 24/06/2011 11:23, Rainer M Krug a écrit : > > I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it >> right), so: >> >> lyx-daily >> daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: > --- BRANCH_2_0_X (unstable but usable) As JMarc already noted, that's not true. Apart from expeptions that actually should not happen (but can happen even in official "stable" releases), BRANCH_2_0_X is usually even more stable than our official "stable" releases. Jürgen

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 11:52, Rainer M Krug a écrit : Ok. I think this all biols down to the understanding of how stable trunk and BRANCH_2_0_X is. So the first question is: Which binaries do we want to have in ppas? and We/you obviously have to decide what ppas are really useful (do adding new ones

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Sorry - forgot the reply all On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Rainer M Krug wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > >> Rainer M Krug wrote: >> > --- BRANCH_2_0_X (unstable but usable) >> >> As JMarc already noted, that's not

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 24/06/2011 11:52, Rainer M Krug a écrit : > > Ok. I think this all biols down to the understanding of how stable trunk >> and BRANCH_2_0_X is. >> >> So the first question is: >> >> Which binaries do we want to

external material template: SVG -> PDF/PS with LaTeX

Hi, I wrote a template and conversion scripts for importing Inkscape SVG graphics as PDFTEX or PSTEX as external material in LyX. It works analog to the FIG template and its scripts. You will need Inkscape 0.48. It can save the SVG image as a PDF or EPS file and place the text in a LaTeX file

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 12:22, Rainer M Krug a écrit : I think one ppa should only hold the official final releases, with version suffixes, and one lyx, which updates the ubuntu one. This should be the one for the user who really want's to be on the save side. One other ppa should have the opposite -

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 24/06/2011 12:22, Rainer M Krug a écrit : > > > I think one ppa should only hold the official final releases, with >> version suffixes, and one lyx, which updates the ubuntu one. This should >> be the one for

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 14:26, Rainer M Krug a écrit : In this scheme we would be mixing releases with daily builds, which I think is not a good idea. Also: a beta tester might not be interested in the daily builds. Especially, I would not mix the daily trunk builds with anything else more stable - if

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 24/06/2011 14:26, Rainer M Krug a écrit : > > In this scheme we would be mixing releases with daily builds, which I >> think is not a good idea. Also: a beta tester might not be interested in >> the daily

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Le 24/06/2011 15:34, Rainer M Krug a écrit : My problem is to separate two kind of users: * people who want a version of lyx safe with their documents (lyx releases, branch daily builds). This is the ppa we can recommend to everybody. OK - if the developers feel comfortable

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

To chip in.. On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Concerning naming, I would propose an explicit separation between daily and > releases with names like > lyx-daily-(stable|trunk) > This naming scheme seems most intuitive for daily builds. For most

RE: #7647: Punctuation keys treated as dead keys

Thanks very much for the fast reply and suggestions. Because this problem occurs only with LyX and not elsewhere, I wonder whether LyX somehow misinterprets my settings. It *used* to work properly, but in the middle of editing a document the key mapping suddenly changed. I did nothing prior

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On 06/24/2011 05:38 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 24/06/2011 11:23, Rainer M Krug a écrit : >> I am sticking here with the mozilla terminology (I hope I get it >> right), so: >> >> lyx-daily >> daily builds of trunk and 2.0.x - highly unstable and *only* for >> testing purposes --

Informative diff between po files versions

Hello, I wanted to find what were the recent changes I submitted to a po file. Alas, the diff is not informative because the true changes are masked by a lot of noise (modified comment lines, identical message lines rewritten differently, etc.). Is there a tool which makes a real diff by

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

Rainer M Krug wrote: > I just think that a beta tester (even an alpha tester) is not nearly as > adventurous as a daily build trunk user. > > So if we are talking about types of users, I would possibly add the trunc > user as a third category which would mean a third ppa. to be frank, except

Re: Informative diff between po files versions

Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: > Hello, > > I wanted to find what were the recent changes I submitted to a po file. > > Alas, the diff is not informative because the true changes are masked by > a lot of noise (modified comment lines, identical message lines rewritten > differently, etc.). > > Is

Possible change to LaTeX export

Dear LyX developers, First of all, I would like to express my gratitude for the development of LyX. It has sped up my scientific typesetting by a factor of 2-3. I have a possible suggestion for the LaTeX export code. I've noticed that the filenames in figures are exported without their

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Rainer M Krug wrote: >> I just think that a beta tester (even an alpha tester) is not nearly as >> adventurous as a daily build trunk user. >> >> So if we are talking about types of users, I would possibly add the trunc >> user

Re: LyX daily build and 2.0.x ppa

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Liviu Andronic wrote: > In my view "release" is extraneous here. We could have instead: > lyx-1.6 (for latest stable 1.6.x release; probably forever 1.6.10) > lyx (for latest stable release, currently 2.0.0 and soon 2.0.1, while > in the