On Friday 31 May 2002 2:19 am, John Levon wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
See attached.
So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
Nope. I don't have a 1.2 tree at the moment.
A
Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Angus On Friday 31 May 2002 2:19 am, John Levon wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
See attached.
So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
Angus Nope. I don't have a 1.2 tree at the moment. A
I did
On Friday 31 May 2002 2:19 am, John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > See attached.
>
> So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
Nope. I don't have a 1.2 tree at the moment.
A
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> On Friday 31 May 2002 2:19 am, John Levon wrote:
>> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote: >
>> See attached.
>>
>> So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
Angus> Nope. I don't have a 1.2 tree at
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Stephan Witt wrote:
[...]
| Now that libsigc++ is more wide spread (ie. when it was included few
| major distros had a useful version of it) I want to remove it from the
| dist -- whether we require it for all signals or just for the gtk
| stuff.
It seems to not
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Stephan Witt wrote:
[...]
> > | Now that libsigc++ is more wide spread (ie. when it was included few
> > | major distros had a useful version of it) I want to remove it from the
> > | dist -- whether we require it for all signals or just for the gtk
> > | stuff.
> >
> > It
John == John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
See attached.
John So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
I am doing it.
JMarc
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> See attached.
John> So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
I am doing it.
JMarc
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
See attached.
So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
regards
john
--
Do you mean to tell me that The Prince is not the set textbook for CS1072
Professional Issues ? What on earth do you learn in that course ?
-
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 11:12:52AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> See attached.
So are you going to apply this to 1.2 branch ?
regards
john
--
"Do you mean to tell me that "The Prince" is not the set textbook for CS1072
Professional Issues ? What on earth do you learn in that course ?"
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Wed, 22 May 2002, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Boost signals however delegates creation of functions objects and
binding to two other libs, with sigc++ this is integrated in the
signal/slot code.
| Not quite as nice then.
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Wed, 22 May 2002, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
>>>Boost signals however delegates creation of functions objects and
>>>binding to two other libs, with sigc++ this is integrated in the
>>>signal/slot code.
>>>
> | Not
On Wed, 22 May 2002, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Boost signals however delegates creation of functions objects and
binding to two other libs, with sigc++ this is integrated in the
signal/slot code.
Not quite as nice then.
Am I correct in beliving that gtkmm cannot exist without sigc++, and
On Wed, 22 May 2002, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Boost signals however delegates creation of functions objects and
> binding to two other libs, with sigc++ this is integrated in the
> signal/slot code.
Not quite as nice then.
> Am I correct in beliving that gtkmm cannot exist without sigc++,
See attached.
Angus
Index: src/frontends/controllers/ChangeLog
===
RCS file: /usr/local/lyx/cvsroot/lyx-devel/src/frontends/controllers/ChangeLog,v
retrieving revision 1.173
diff -u -p -r1.173 ChangeLog
---
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| See attached.
| Angus
Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
--
Lgb
On Tuesday 21 May 2002 11:24 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| See attached.
| Angus
Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
You'll need to give me some karma to commit it. While you're at it, just
shove it in.
Angus
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tuesday 21 May 2002 11:24 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| See attached.
| Angus
Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
| You'll need to give me some karma to commit it. While you're at it, just
| shove it in.
On Tuesday 21 May 2002 1:02 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tuesday 21 May 2002 11:24 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| See attached.
| Angus
Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
|
| You'll need to give
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me permission to
set up a branch. Let's call it BRANCH_guii. I guess that at least John and I
should have permission to commit.
And if you are at it: What about some
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me permission to
set up a branch. Let's call it BRANCH_guii. I guess that at least John and I
should have permission to commit.
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 02:29:42PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Can we please have a run down of what features to work on in 1.3.0CVS
first.
Let's get that list going.
I've posted my part already.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not
On 21-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Let's get that list going.
First of all I don't know how much time I will have for LyX in future.
Second to tell you the truth for 1.3.0 I plan to ONLY work on GUII complete.
IMO that should be our only real 1.3.0 worklist so that we can release a
On Tuesday 21 May 2002 1:29 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me permission
to set up a branch. Let's call it BRANCH_guii. I guess
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 02:29:42PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
If everybody is off working on his pet branch we will not be able to
do much...
OK We've had Andre's list. My list :
o GUII
o bug fixes
Simple eh :)
john
--
SirCam: Hi! How are you? Eliza: Why are you
At 02:29 PM 5/21/02 +0200, you wrote:
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me
permission to
set up a branch. Let's call it BRANCH_guii. I guess that at least John
Michael Koziarski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| At 02:29 PM 5/21/02 +0200, you wrote:
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me
permission to
set up a branch. Let's
| I'd like to do the following:
| - upgrade of libsigc version to 1.4/1.3 whatever the release version
| ends up getting called.
I am a bit ambivalent about this one... it might be easier to just use
the boost signal/slot library in the core or lyx, and ...
| - Gtkmm2 frontend.
... keep
Michael Koziarski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| I'd like to do the following:
| - upgrade of libsigc version to 1.4/1.3 whatever the release version
| ends up getting called.
I am a bit ambivalent about this one... it might be easier to just use
the boost signal/slot library in the core or lyx,
Am I correct in beliving that gtkmm cannot exist without sigc++, and
that if gtkmm is installed then a libsigc++ will also be installed?
(so we won't have to provide sigc++ with lyx as we do now)
Yes. Gtkmm uses libsigc++ throughout, it won't build or install without
it. So, if you do
See attached.
Angus
Index: src/frontends/controllers/ChangeLog
===
RCS file: /usr/local/lyx/cvsroot/lyx-devel/src/frontends/controllers/ChangeLog,v
retrieving revision 1.173
diff -u -p -r1.173 ChangeLog
---
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| See attached.
| Angus
Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
--
Lgb
On Tuesday 21 May 2002 11:24 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | See attached.
> | Angus
>
> Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
You'll need to give me some karma to commit it. While you're at it, just
shove it in.
Angus
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tuesday 21 May 2002 11:24 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> | See attached.
>> | Angus
>>
>> Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
>
| You'll need to give me some karma to commit it. While you're at it, just
On Tuesday 21 May 2002 1:02 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Tuesday 21 May 2002 11:24 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> >> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> | See attached.
> >> | Angus
> >>
> >> Put in 1.3.0CVS, queue for 1.2.1.
> |
>
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me permission to
> set up a branch. Let's call it BRANCH_guii. I guess that at least John and I
> should have permission to commit.
And if you are at it: What about some
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me permission to
>> set up a branch. Let's call it BRANCH_guii. I guess that at least John and I
>> should have permission to
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 02:29:42PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Can we please have a run down of what features to work on in 1.3.0CVS
> first.
>
> Let's get that list going.
I've posted "my part" already.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will
On 21-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Let's get that list going.
First of all I don't know how much time I will have for LyX in future.
Second to tell you the truth for 1.3.0 I plan to ONLY work on GUII complete.
IMO that should be our only "real" 1.3.0 worklist so that we can release a
On Tuesday 21 May 2002 1:29 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> >> Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me permission
> >> to set up a branch. Let's call it
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 02:29:42PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> If everybody is off working on his pet branch we will not be able to
> do much...
OK We've had Andre's list. My list :
o GUII
o bug fixes
Simple eh :)
john
--
"SirCam: Hi! How are you? Eliza: Why are you
At 02:29 PM 5/21/02 +0200, you wrote:
>Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>| On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> >> Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me
> permission to
> >> set up a branch. Let's call it BRANCH_guii. I guess that at
Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| At 02:29 PM 5/21/02 +0200, you wrote:
>>Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>| On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> >> Why thank you, sir. While you're at it, why don't you give me
>> permission to
>> >> set
>
>| I'd like to do the following:
>| - upgrade of libsigc version to 1.4/1.3 whatever the release version
>| ends up getting called.
>
>I am a bit ambivalent about this one... it might be easier to just use
>the boost signal/slot library in the core or lyx, and ...
>
>| - Gtkmm2 frontend.
>
Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>| I'd like to do the following:
>>| - upgrade of libsigc version to 1.4/1.3 whatever the release version
>>| ends up getting called.
>>
>>I am a bit ambivalent about this one... it might be easier to just use
>>the boost signal/slot library in
>
>Am I correct in beliving that gtkmm cannot exist without sigc++, and
>that if gtkmm is installed then a libsigc++ will also be installed?
>(so we won't have to provide sigc++ with lyx as we do now)
Yes. Gtkmm uses libsigc++ throughout, it won't build or install without
it. So, if you do
46 matches
Mail list logo
