Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > We could leave this aside for the moment no? Are you afraid that it would > cast the situation in stone and somebody who comes up with a good solution > won't be able to implement it anymore? I was just sharing my thoughts. Pavel

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 30/11/2015 01:15, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: You describe a method for this, above, but to me it sounds like a cumbersome way to force-record the state of an inset (for instance, it I agree it is cumbersome, my reasoning was that I would rather impose this complexity on

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > You describe a method for this, above, but to me it sounds like a > cumbersome way to force-record the state of an inset (for instance, it I agree it is cumbersome, my reasoning was that I would rather impose this complexity on user who is using git & CT than complicating

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 25/11/2015 05:34, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Also it looks technically challenging to me to store the state of insets as user settings. So I am no longer convinced that not storing open/closed state of insets is feasible and realistic. No we don't want to store it as

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: >> 3. General preference (not sure if document or user) for ignoring non >> essential >> changes, which disturbs version control flow. Similar to 1. but it >> would encompass e.g. CT on/off, output_changes, GUI justification. >> I have another candidate here as

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 17/11/2015 21:36, Georg Baum a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 08/11/2015 16:16, Georg Baum a écrit : If I understood Vincent correctly then it would not be a file format change IMHO: As I understood it, he referred to the suggestion that the "track changes" button would be decoupled

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On 11/22/2015 07:29 AM, Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 17/11/2015 21:36, Georg Baum a écrit : >> Guillaume Munch wrote: >> >>> Le 08/11/2015 16:16, Georg Baum a écrit : If I understood Vincent correctly then it would not be a file format change IMHO: As I understood it, he

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 22/11/2015 18:18, Richard Heck a écrit : On 11/22/2015 07:29 AM, Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 17/11/2015 21:36, Georg Baum a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 08/11/2015 16:16, Georg Baum a écrit : If I understood Vincent correctly then it would not be a file format change IMHO: As I

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 08/11/2015 16:16, Georg Baum a écrit : >> >> If I understood Vincent correctly then it would not be a file format >> change IMHO: >> >> As I understood it, he referred to the suggestion that the "track >> changes" button would be decoupled from \track_changes in the

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 07/11/2015 21:18, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Have a new checkbox in document settings labelled "Open with change tracking enabled". Then the current state of change tracking is made independent from this checkbox; only, if the box is checked then it will do as advertised by

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 08/11/2015 16:16, Georg Baum a écrit : Richard Heck wrote: On 11/07/2015 12:36 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Is it really a file format change? If we do not change the physical appearance of the file format, and if we do not change the document output of a certain file, is it then

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On 11/08/2015 11:16 AM, Georg Baum wrote: Richard Heck wrote: On 11/07/2015 12:36 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Is it really a file format change? If we do not change the physical appearance of the file format, and if we do not change the document output of a certain file, is it then

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Richard Heck wrote: > On 11/07/2015 12:36 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> >> Is it really a file format change? If we do not change the physical >> appearance of the file format, and if we do not change the document >> output of a certain file, is it then still forbidden to change in a >>

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On 2015-11-07, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Guillaume Munch wrote: >> Have a new checkbox in document settings labelled "Open with change >> tracking enabled". Then the current state of change tracking is made >> independent from this checkbox; only, if the box is checked then it will >> do as advertised

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 7 novembre 2015 02:02:27 GMT+01:00, Guillaume Munch a écrit : >Yes, I fully understand this point and I agree that a decision has to >be taken somehow quickly, this is why I brought the subject to the >list. >We are in the process of releasing alpha and this discussion is not

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On 11/07/2015 12:36 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > Democracy is not the point IMHO: The point is not to further delay the > release. Implementing a small and safe file format change where everybody > agrees that it is useful does not produce a significant delay. Discussing a >

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > Have a new checkbox in document settings labelled "Open with change > tracking enabled". Then the current state of change tracking is made > independent from this checkbox; only, if the box is checked then it will > do as advertised by the label. Otherwise, the per-user,

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On 11/07/2015 04:46 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 7 novembre 2015 02:02:27 GMT+01:00, Guillaume Munch a écrit : Yes, I fully understand this point and I agree that a decision has to be taken somehow quickly, this is why I brought the subject to the list. We are in the

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 07/11/2015 22:17, Richard Heck a écrit : On 11/07/2015 04:46 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 7 novembre 2015 02:02:27 GMT+01:00, Guillaume Munch a écrit : Yes, I fully understand this point and I agree that a decision has to be taken somehow quickly, this is why I

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 21:42, Georg Baum a écrit : I think there is general consensus about \justification and \output_changes, so if this is OK with Scott you could move these to preferences, but for \track_changes I do not see a consensus, so this setting should not be changed so short before a

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

> Democracy is not the point IMHO: The point is not to further delay the > release. Implementing a small and safe file format change where everybody > agrees that it is useful does not produce a significant delay. Discussing a > controversal change where no easy solution is in sight has the

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 05:37, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: express any intention. Your description gives the impression that if your collaborator starts writing and they do not see that the changes are not being tracked, then they will not know or care about enabling change tracking, as

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 10:06, Stephan Witt a écrit : In this sense there is no need to reduce the likely-hood of merge conflicts with the state of change tracking. It's not a setting to toggle often, IMHO. Well, since some people do change it often (if only to piss off their co-author :), we could try

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 06/11/2015 10:06, Stephan Witt a écrit : >> >> In this sense there is no need to reduce the likely-hood of merge >> conflicts >> with the state of change tracking. It's not a setting to toggle often, >> IMHO. >

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Am 06.11.2015 um 09:52 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes : > Le 06/11/2015 05:37, Pavel Sanda a écrit : >> Guillaume Munch wrote: >>> express any intention. Your description gives the impression that if >>> your collaborator starts writing and they do not see that the changes >>>

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 02:31, Guillaume Munch a écrit : Besides the lack of intention conveyed, I already mentioned the principle of least surprise: it is not clear for a new user that this is a purpose of the button. So if what is currently implemented is really what you have in mind, then it is a very

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 07:01, Vincent van Ravesteijn a écrit : Op 6 nov. 2015 05:44 schreef "Pavel Sanda" >: > > Guillaume Munch wrote: > > That "CT lock" feature, instead of imposing such a strict constraint > > (that could always be circumvented one way or the

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 04:37, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: express any intention. Your description gives the impression that if your collaborator starts writing and they do not see that the changes are not being tracked, then they will not know or care about enabling change tracking, as

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 09:06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 06/11/2015 02:31, Guillaume Munch a écrit : Besides the lack of intention conveyed, I already mentioned the principle of least surprise: it is not clear for a new user that this is a purpose of the button. So if what is currently

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 06/11/2015 09:06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : >> Le 06/11/2015 02:31, Guillaume Munch a écrit : >> >> In terms of least surprise, I would add that both msword 2007 and >> libreoffice 5 store the setting in the document and consider the >> document as modified when

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 05/11/2015 20:25, Georg Baum a écrit : >> Guillaume Munch wrote: >> >>> In addition, what appears even more special to me is the number of times >>> when it produces the effects that you mention: the only times when a >>> per-user, per-document preference would not

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > What actually makes sense is to have a document setting like > "under_version_control". When the user opens such a document (for the > first time?) we turn on change tracking. What has version control to do with change tracking? Georg

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 21:28, Georg Baum a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 06/11/2015 09:06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 06/11/2015 02:31, Guillaume Munch a écrit : In terms of least surprise, I would add that both msword 2007 and libreoffice 5 store the setting in the document and consider

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 06/11/2015 21:46, Guillaume Munch a écrit : Le 06/11/2015 21:28, Georg Baum a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 06/11/2015 09:06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 06/11/2015 02:31, Guillaume Munch a écrit : In terms of least surprise, I would add that both msword 2007 and libreoffice 5

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > I think that a regular use-case is that one author writes, and the other > one provides feedback using track changes. Yes, I did not think of that (because I prefer giving feedback on paper, and if I receive feedback then mostly from people who do not use LyX...)

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 04/11/2015 20:06, Georg Baum a écrit : > > My experience with multi-author collaboration and change tracking > differs. The various portions of the document tend to "belong" to one > author and an author uses change tracking depending on whether that part > belongs to

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > express any intention. Your description gives the impression that if > your collaborator starts writing and they do not see that the changes > are not being tracked, then they will not know or care about enabling > change tracking, as if they had no clue, and this little

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > So we tend to switch change tracking many times. Would be distinguishing between CT-on 'permanent' vs 'this session only' (automatically discarded when file is closed) of any help? Pavel

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > That "CT lock" feature, instead of imposing such a strict constraint > (that could always be circumvented one way or the other...), could maybe > display instead a message like "Pavel Sanda has requested that changes > be tracked. Are you sure that you want to disable

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 01:41:22AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote: > >I think there is general consensus about \justification and \output_changes, > >so if this is OK with Scott you could move these to preferences, but for > >\track_changes I do not see a consensus, so this setting should not be >

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 05/11/2015 07:31, Vincent van Ravesteijn a écrit : On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote: Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I consider it also document, not user, setting. It would cause confusions if this setting is not transfered to my collaborators within the

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 05/11/2015 20:25, Georg Baum a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 04/11/2015 20:06, Georg Baum a écrit : My experience with multi-author collaboration and change tracking differs. The various portions of the document tend to "belong" to one author and an author uses change tracking

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > What actually makes sense is to have a document setting like > "under_version_control". When the user opens such a document (for the first > time?) we turn on change tracking. Not sure I am following what you propose. under_version_control is related to our VCS

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Op 6 nov. 2015 05:44 schreef "Pavel Sanda" : > > Guillaume Munch wrote: > > That "CT lock" feature, instead of imposing such a strict constraint > > (that could always be circumvented one way or the other...), could maybe > > display instead a message like "Pavel Sanda has requested

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Op 4-11-2015 om 21:06 schreef Georg Baum: Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 03/11/2015 21:16, Georg Baum a écrit : I don't think there is an easy solution, because it depends on the use case. For example, in our documentation workflows \tracking_changes needs to be the same for all users, so this

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 04/11/2015 20:06, Georg Baum a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 03/11/2015 21:16, Georg Baum a écrit : I don't think there is an easy solution, because it depends on the use case. For example, in our documentation workflows \tracking_changes needs to be the same for all users, so this

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > > I consider it also document, not user, setting. It would cause confusions > > if this setting is not transfered to my collaborators within the document. > > I disagree. There is no confusion possible. It is. When the document circles I want the CT be part of

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On 2015-11-05, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> > I consider it also document, not user, setting. It would cause confusions >> > if this setting is not transfered to my collaborators within the document. >> I disagree. There is no confusion possible. > It is. When the

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> > I consider it also document, not user, setting. It would cause confusions >> > if this setting is not transfered to my collaborators within the document. >> >> I disagree. There is no confusion

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 03/11/2015 21:16, Georg Baum a écrit : >> >> I don't think there is an easy solution, because it depends on the use >> case. For example, in our documentation workflows \tracking_changes needs >> to be the same for all users, so this should not go into the preferences.

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:50 AM, Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 03/11/2015 21:16, Georg Baum a écrit : >> >> Guillaume Munch wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> I am bringing this to the list due to the timing, due to the fact that >>> it is a file format change,

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Guillaume Munch wrote: >> For \track_changes, I do not understand your rationale for making it a >> setting of the document. It is not locked on, so the user who edits the >> documentations has to know in any case that he should

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > > > I am bringing this to the list due to the timing, due to the fact that > it is a file format change, and due to the fact that it looks severe in > the above context. > > I suggest moving these settings to the user preferences. >

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 03/11/2015 19:49, LyX Ticket Tracker a écrit : #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file -+ Reporter: gadmm| Owner: lasgouttes Type: defect | Status: new Priority:

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Le 03/11/2015 21:16, Georg Baum a écrit : Guillaume Munch wrote: I am bringing this to the list due to the timing, due to the fact that it is a file format change, and due to the fact that it looks severe in the above context. I suggest moving these

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

Guillaume Munch wrote: > For \track_changes, I do not understand your rationale for making it a > setting of the document. It is not locked on, so the user who edits the > documentations has to know in any case that he should track changes (if I > had not been told to, then I'd have turned it