On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 08:15:27AM -0500, Bo Peng wrote:
> The only serious patch I need to do with qt4.py is actually related to
> the .C extension we use. It is not considered as a C++ extension
> there. Also, under windows, since windows is not case sensitive, the
> .C files are considered as
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 04:19:29PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >scons: Configure: Checking for main() in C library nsl...
>
> What is this nsl library?
It's networking functions on certain UNIX types like Solaris.
regards
john
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:36:57PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz a écrit :
> >Last time the Windows developers wanted to have .vcproj files.
> >
> >They got them.
> >
> >Now Windows developers want scons files.
> >
> >So what tomorrow?
> >
> A cheese cake.
Let them eat cake!
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:07:32AM +0200, Michael Gerz wrote:
> I must confess that this patch will break CT in some cases
Why is there such pushback against making branches for stuff that's
*known* broken?
regards
john
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 05:00:23PM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Personally I use a test procedure for every new release of my
LyXWinInstaller. Derived from this here's my proposal for new releases
of LyX:
Some time ago I started a lyx-tests CVS repository for precisely this
regression-testing
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 06:04:13PM +0200, Michael Gerz wrote:
Yes, that was definitely the problem. We locked ourself by a code freeze
period that started too early (and lasted too long).
No, that wasn't the problem, it was too much changes allowed at once,
rather than small simple
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 05:00:23PM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Personally I use a test procedure for every new release of my
> LyXWinInstaller. Derived from this here's my proposal for new releases
> of LyX:
Some time ago I started a lyx-tests CVS repository for precisely this
regression-testing
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 06:04:13PM +0200, Michael Gerz wrote:
> Yes, that was definitely the problem. We locked ourself by a code freeze
> period that started too early (and lasted too long).
No, that wasn't the problem, it was too much changes allowed at once,
rather than small simple
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 10:58:22AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
--disable-stdlib-debug
Already tried both.
--disable-pch
OK. Is the default to enable?
john
Looks like it's pch, I can compile with:
./configure --prefix=/usr/local/lyx-cvs --enable-maintainer-mode
--enable-debug QTDIR=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3 --disable-pch
--disale-stdlib-debug --disable-concept-checks --with-frontend=qt xforms
regards
john
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 10:58:22AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> --disable-stdlib-debug
Already tried both.
> --disable-pch
OK. Is the default to enable?
john
Looks like it's pch, I can compile with:
./configure --prefix=/usr/local/lyx-cvs --enable-maintainer-mode
--enable-debug QTDIR=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3 --disable-pch
--disale-stdlib-debug --disable-concept-checks --with-frontend="qt xforms"
regards
john
text.o(.bss+0x3):/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.0.2/../../../../include/c++/4.0.2/bits/stl_vector.h:352:
multiple definition of `(anonymous namespace)::_6'
Bidi.o(.bss+0x3):/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.0.2/../../../../include/c++/4.0.2/bits/stl_algobase.h:617:
first defined here
On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 10:25:25PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
text.o(.bss+0x3):/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.0.2/../../../../include/c++/4.0.2/bits/stl_vector.h:352:
| multiple definition of `(anonymous namespace)::_6'
I don't get them.
FC4 and FC5 works flawlessly for me.
text.o(.bss+0x3):/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.0.2/../../../../include/c++/4.0.2/bits/stl_vector.h:352:
multiple definition of `(anonymous namespace)::_6'
Bidi.o(.bss+0x3):/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.0.2/../../../../include/c++/4.0.2/bits/stl_algobase.h:617:
first defined here
On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 10:25:25PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> |
> text.o(.bss+0x3):/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.0.2/../../../../include/c++/4.0.2/bits/stl_vector.h:352:
> | multiple definition of `(anonymous namespace)::_6'
>
> I don't get them.
>
> FC4 and FC5 works flawlessly
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 12:12:06PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
I think the best solution is probably, as Abdel recommended, to have two
buttons instead of one in the bibtex dialog: Browse (through directory) and
Select (from the bst file list).
It's too confusing.
How about a
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:14:40PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
There are a number of bugs that need to be fixed in the qt4 frontend.
Inspired by Edwin recent bug fixing activity I thought it might be a
good idea to report them in case someone wants to fix them. I would like
to enter
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:45:47PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
How about a multi-selection list box showing all the found
bibtex's by default. A Browse... button would do the browsing:
i like this much better
(would checkboxes be clearer than highlighted items?)
I don't think so no.
Now
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:55:21PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
We need also a 1.5.0svn version.
Done.
john
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:10:13PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
Checking which one are selected would be difficult. There
must be a solution where only the selected databases are
visible (I would be fine with a show only selected toggle
or somesuch).
what about having *two* buttons on the
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 02:40:27PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
I hate to be a PITA, but I'm not convinced. Look, I have currently more than
100 bib files in that list (lots from the TeXLive distribution, and my own).
Checking which one are selected would be difficult. There must be a
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:21:17PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
John Levon wrote:
This sounds worse than it is now...
Why actually?
You can't easily make the decision on which button to press until after
you've pressed it and found out.
regards
john
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:27:00PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
You can't easily make the decision on which button to press until after
you've pressed it and found out.
This is until you have tried it two times, then you know.
You mean you've somehow memorised whether the database
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 12:12:06PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> I think the best solution is probably, as Abdel recommended, to have two
> buttons instead of one in the bibtex dialog: "Browse" (through directory) and
> "Select" (from the bst file list).
It's too confusing.
How about a
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:14:40PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> There are a number of bugs that need to be fixed in the qt4 frontend.
> Inspired by Edwin recent bug fixing activity I thought it might be a
> good idea to report them in case someone wants to fix them. I would like
> to
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:45:47PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> > How about a multi-selection list box showing all the found
> > bibtex's by default. A "Browse..." button would do the browsing:
>
> i like this much better
>
> (would checkboxes be clearer than highlighted items?)
I don't think so
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:55:21PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> We need also a 1.5.0svn version.
Done.
john
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:10:13PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> > Checking which one are selected would be difficult. There
> > must be a solution where only the selected databases are
> > visible (I would be fine with a "show only selected" toggle
> > or somesuch).
>
> what about having *two*
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 02:40:27PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> I hate to be a PITA, but I'm not convinced. Look, I have currently more than
> 100 bib files in that list (lots from the TeXLive distribution, and my own).
> Checking which one are selected would be difficult. There must be
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:21:17PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> John Levon wrote:
> > This sounds worse than it is now...
>
> Why actually?
You can't easily make the decision on which button to press until after
you've pressed it and found out.
regards
john
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:27:00PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> > You can't easily make the decision on which button to press until after
> > you've pressed it and found out.
>
> This is until you have tried it two times, then you know.
You mean you've somehow memorised whether the
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 12:51:07PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
i personally think this is more convenient.
comments, opinions?
Can't I have a qt3 version to look at? Do we really want the two
frontends to diverge over these things?
regards
john
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 06:19:05PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
it is just the 1st dialog in the qt3 version, but when you click
add... it directly pops up the file dialog to add a bib file.
Why is it more convenient to walk through the file system than have a
list of your bibtex databases in
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 07:10:12PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
John On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 06:19:05PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
it is just the 1st dialog in the qt3 version, but when you click
add... it directly pops up the file dialog to add a bib file.
John Why is it more
I get one of these every time I post to this mailing list. Can someone
check the sub list and remove it??
john
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 12:51:07PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> i personally think this is more convenient.
>
> comments, opinions?
Can't I have a qt3 version to look at? Do we really want the two
frontends to diverge over these things?
regards
john
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 06:19:05PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> it is just the 1st dialog in the qt3 version, but when you click
> add... it directly pops up the file dialog to add a bib file.
Why is it more convenient to walk through the file system than have a
list of your bibtex databases in
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 07:10:12PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> John> On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 06:19:05PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> >> it is just the 1st dialog in the qt3 version, but when you click
> >> add... it directly pops up the file dialog to add a bib file.
>
> John> Why is it
I get one of these every time I post to this mailing list. Can someone
check the sub list and remove it??
john
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 11:03:34AM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
i am trying to get some work done with it, but at the moment cannot insert a
bibtex biblio...
why is there an extra dialog here btw? think i like the 1.3 version better
perhaps we can reinstate that one while john levon
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:37:33PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I have read some people complaining in lyx-users but maybe some poll is
in order. In any case, no need to erase any code, we can provide both in
the qt4 frontend and switch to one or the other via a compiler switch or
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 06:21:44PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I think its a matter of beginner vs power user.
No. If it comes down to that, we've already failed.
tool? I think a simple, case-insensitive, search-as-type is more than
enough and more intuitive. A more powerful search tool
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:15:54PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| I just built and packaged LyX 1.4.0 for the Blastwave project. I found
| that the following error occurs (x86 only, not SPARC):
|
[...]
|
| This is problem is very similar to the issue I reported on Oct. 26,
| 2005.
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 11:03:34AM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> i am trying to get some work done with it, but at the moment cannot insert a
> bibtex biblio...
>
> why is there an extra dialog here btw? think i like the 1.3 version better
>
> perhaps we can reinstate that on
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:37:33PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> I have read some people complaining in lyx-users but maybe some poll is
> in order. In any case, no need to erase any code, we can provide both in
> the qt4 frontend and switch to one or the other via a compiler switch or
>
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 06:21:44PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> I think its a matter of "beginner vs power user".
No. If it comes down to that, we've already failed.
> tool? I think a simple, case-insensitive, search-as-type is more than
> enough and more intuitive. A more powerful search
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:15:54PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | I just built and packaged LyX 1.4.0 for the Blastwave project. I found
> | that the following error occurs (x86 only, not SPARC):
> |
> [...]
> |
> | This is problem is very similar to the issue I reported on Oct. 26,
> |
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 04:23:00PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
This seems to be very close to Shark.app:
http://www.daimi.au.dk/~sandmann/sysprof/
*grumble*
john
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 06:49:07PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
To my defense, I shall add that I never managed to use oprofile (I
plead guilty of incompetence).
Hmmm... I dunno how. You only have to do one piece of setup...
What I saw on the sysprof page seemed just simple...
Alas
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 04:23:00PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> This seems to be very close to Shark.app:
> http://www.daimi.au.dk/~sandmann/sysprof/
*grumble*
john
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 06:49:07PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> To my defense, I shall add that I never managed to use oprofile (I
> plead guilty of incompetence).
Hmmm... I dunno how. You only have to do one piece of setup...
> What I saw on the sysprof page seemed just simple...
Alas
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 10:45:08AM +0100, Helge Hafting wrote:
Context menus certainly have their uses, but also disadvantages:
1. They're invisible. Charstyles are so important that they
may deserve permanent visibility. Today paragraph
styles and the charstyle-like bold emph have
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 10:45:08AM +0100, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Context menus certainly have their uses, but also disadvantages:
> 1. They're invisible. Charstyles are so important that they
>may deserve permanent visibility. Today paragraph
>styles and the charstyle-like bold & emph
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 03:27:59PM +0100, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
Sounds better to me than a dialog. I am wondering why LyX does not use a
context menu (right mouse click seems to be unused). Has that something to do
with the multiple frontends LyX supports?
We badly need context menu support.
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 03:27:59PM +0100, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> Sounds better to me than a dialog. I am wondering why LyX does not use a
> context menu (right mouse click seems to be unused). Has that something to do
> with the multiple frontends LyX supports?
We badly need context menu
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 09:37:06AM -0700, David Raymond wrote:
I don't see how to set the document class with the default user
interface in 1.4.0. Am I missing something?
Document-Settings.
john
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 09:37:06AM -0700, David Raymond wrote:
> I don't see how to set the document class with the default user
> interface in 1.4.0. Am I missing something?
Document->Settings.
john
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 03:36:56PM +, John C. Spray wrote:
One point - it is nice for people downloading tarballs to be able to see
what's changed here and there, so old fashioned Changelogs should still
be generated for released tarballs. Hopefully not to difficult to make
automatic.
I
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 03:36:56PM +, John C. Spray wrote:
> One point - it is nice for people downloading tarballs to be able to see
> what's changed here and there, so old fashioned Changelogs should still
> be generated for released tarballs. Hopefully not to difficult to make
>
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 11:26:54AM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
I'd also argue that Abdel should create a qt4 directory in HEAD as soon as
possible, so that we can help him polishing the remaining edges. I think that
Absolutely.
john
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 10:42:51PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Lars == Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| Lars I don't agree. The bug is fixed. So it should be resolved as
| Lars fixed and the target set to the version
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 11:26:54AM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> I'd also argue that Abdel should create a qt4 directory in HEAD as soon as
> possible, so that we can help him polishing the remaining edges. I think that
Absolutely.
john
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 10:42:51PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> |
> | Lars> I don't agree. The bug is fixed. So it should be resolved as
> | Lars> fixed and the target
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 09:33:11PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
I think now is a good time to retire the XForms frontend and, once your
port is verified as working I'd also suggest retiring the Qt2/3 frontend.
Could we at least wait until /somebody/ is shipping it :)
john
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 09:33:11PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> I think now is a good time to retire the XForms frontend and, once your
> port is verified as working I'd also suggest retiring the Qt2/3 frontend.
Could we at least wait until /somebody/ is shipping it :)
john
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:01:51PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:00:40PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
|
| Given your observations, I suspect that the others are all using the g++
| super-safe iterators; they have to be explicitly turned off when
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:26:15PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Yet there's lots of people using CVS/SVN and not necessarily knowing
| about it. Like me.
I am reluctant to turn it off... it finds bugs.
Then can we add a big fat warning at the bottom of configure at least?
cheers
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:01:51PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:00:40PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> |
> | > > Given your observations, I suspect that the others are all using the g++
> | > > super-safe iterators; they have to be explicitly turned off when
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:26:15PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | Yet there's lots of people using CVS/SVN and not necessarily knowing
> | about it. Like me.
>
> I am reluctant to turn it off... it finds bugs.
Then can we add a big fat warning at the bottom of configure at least?
cheers
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 04:25:01PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
If you really want to open up the door again for trivial patches we
are IMHO going to delay 1.4.0 for quite some time. Wake me when you
are done.
FWIW I agree with you. There's a never-ending supply of things that can
be
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 03:38:20PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
You see, I don't know of any critical bugs as of now.
That's good news indeed.
I just went through all the 1.4.1 bugs and retargeted a few to 1.4.0 for
evaluation.
john
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 10:55:58PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
On one hand, IMHO, if released now, 1.4.0 wouldn't bring that much to
the final user compared to 1.3.7 and it is much slower. As a user I will
stick with 1.3.7.
It's worth remembering that one of the reasons that 1.4.0 is so
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 04:25:01PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> If you really want to open up the door again for trivial patches we
> are IMHO going to delay 1.4.0 for quite some time. Wake me when you
> are done.
FWIW I agree with you. There's a never-ending supply of things that can
be
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 03:38:20PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > You see, I don't know of any critical bugs as of now.
>
> That's good news indeed.
I just went through all the 1.4.1 bugs and retargeted a few to 1.4.0 for
evaluation.
john
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 10:55:58PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> On one hand, IMHO, if released now, 1.4.0 wouldn't bring that much to
> the final user compared to 1.3.7 and it is much slower. As a user I will
> stick with 1.3.7.
It's worth remembering that one of the reasons that 1.4.0 is
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 08:19:33PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
It looks like a similar thing is happening... not nice, as we would have
to simultaneously change front end code, controller code and code for
three different spell checkers.
Should we aim at replacing this stuff by an
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 08:19:33PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> It looks like a similar thing is happening... not nice, as we would have
> to simultaneously change front end code, controller code and code for
> three different spell checkers.
>
> Should we aim at replacing this stuff by an
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 10:44:52AM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
i just wanted you to think about 2 issues before you get 1.4 out of the door:
1. what should be on the standard toolbar?
2. which toolbar should be shown where?
Hi Edwin, I don't think it's an appropriate time to be re-organising
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 10:44:52AM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
i would suggest this (in default.ui):
Toolbars
standard on,top
extra off,top
table table,top
math math,top
minibuffer off,bottom
End
I disagree. The extra toolbar is very useful and does
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 03:57:01PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
I agree - context-sensitive toolbars should appear and
disappear at the bottom of the window.
so why don't we activate them there for 1.4?
Because they're extremely distracting for many people, and useful for
others. It's a pity
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 10:44:52AM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> i just wanted you to think about 2 issues before you get 1.4 out of the door:
>
> 1. what should be on the standard toolbar?
> 2. which toolbar should be shown where?
Hi Edwin, I don't think it's an appropriate time to be
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 10:44:52AM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> i would suggest this (in default.ui):
>
> Toolbars
> "standard" "on,top"
> "extra" "off,top"
> "table" "table,top"
> "math" "math,top"
> "minibuffer" "off,bottom"
> End
I disagree. The "extra"
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 03:57:01PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> > I agree - context-sensitive toolbars should appear and
> > disappear at the bottom of the window.
>
> so why don't we activate them there for 1.4?
Because they're extremely distracting for many people, and useful for
others. It's a
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:48:16AM +0100, Charles de Miramon wrote:
Maybe at some point, LyX could ask some help on the Kollaboration forum of
Janet Theobroma (http://theobromas.blogspot.com/) which is a place on
kde-artists.org where developers meet artists.
That'd be super.
regards
john
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:48:16AM +0100, Charles de Miramon wrote:
> Maybe at some point, LyX could ask some help on the Kollaboration forum of
> Janet Theobroma (http://theobromas.blogspot.com/) which is a place on
> kde-artists.org where developers meet artists.
That'd be super.
regards
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 03:05:42PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
* the icons are extremely ugly (and very inconsistent in style)
We badly need an artist on staff.
* toolbar visibility should be configurable through gui
Yes, it should, but it's not.
* it would be very nice if command sequences
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 03:36:04PM +0100, Frederic-Emmanuel PICCA wrote:
What about using the same icones than openoffice or abiword etc... where
we can, and create a new set for others ?
That's what we did (with the KDE icons). It's nowhere near good enough.
john
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 03:05:42PM +0100, Leuven, E. wrote:
> * the icons are extremely ugly (and very inconsistent in style)
We badly need an artist on staff.
> * toolbar visibility should be configurable through gui
Yes, it should, but it's not.
> * it would be very nice if command
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 03:36:04PM +0100, Frederic-Emmanuel PICCA wrote:
> What about using the same icones than openoffice or abiword etc... where
> we can, and create a new set for others ?
That's what we did (with the KDE icons). It's nowhere near good enough.
john
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 10:46:51AM +0100, Helge Hafting wrote:
Thunderbird 1.0.7 seems to get this stuff right. Normally, you can't drag
any part of the toolbar. But there is a customize mode for those who
want to do such things. I am not against customizing, but I think such
things
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 10:46:51AM +0100, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Thunderbird 1.0.7 seems to get this stuff right. Normally, you can't drag
> any part of the toolbar. But there is a "customize mode" for those who
> want to do such things. I am not against customizing, but I think such
> things
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 11:33:26AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
I don't care for 99% of the stuff that's on the net. Why should we
disable stuff people expect?
Funny, on my KDE desktop not a single one of the applications has such
floating toolbars.
john
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 11:33:26AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> I don't care for 99% of the stuff that's on the net. Why should we
> disable stuff people expect?
Funny, on my KDE desktop not a single one of the applications has such
floating toolbars.
john
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 02:58:00PM +0100, Martin Hinsch wrote:
non-standard, meaning that it's not possible (anymore) to drag them,
make them float or make them vertical.
This is intentionally disabled, somewhere on the net is some description
of why this is a bad idea.
Most important it
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 02:58:00PM +0100, Martin Hinsch wrote:
> "non-standard", meaning that it's not possible (anymore) to drag them,
> make them float or make them vertical.
This is intentionally disabled, somewhere on the net is some description
of why this is a bad idea.
> Most
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:32:58PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Angus Given that we ship an oldish version of gettext, perhaps this
Angus vulnerability report is of interest:
Angus http://lwn.net/Articles/105978/
Only for people who
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:32:58PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> Given that we ship an oldish version of gettext, perhaps this
> Angus> vulnerability report is of interest:
> Angus> http://lwn.net/Articles/105978/
>
>
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 02:47:34PM +0100, Michael Gerz wrote:
IMHO if a patch fixes a bug, it should go in as soon as possible. I
This policy would be great if patches never caused bugs. This isn't
true, unfortunately. There has to be a point at which we reach a set of
known bugs that we can
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 02:47:34PM +0100, Michael Gerz wrote:
> IMHO if a patch fixes a bug, it should go in as soon as possible. I
This policy would be great if patches never caused bugs. This isn't
true, unfortunately. There has to be a point at which we reach a set of
known bugs that we can
401 - 500 of 13943 matches
Mail list logo
