Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread John Levon
On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 11:13:53AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > A double-open bug was reproted, you claim that the patch you checked > in should fix this, and I wonder it got fixed for the original > reporter as well. Apologies for the confusion. I hoped the "btw...@ would indicate my amb

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Juergen Vigna
On 13-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >| I fail to see the double open bug? What bugs are you refering too? >| If you mean that there is another bug open which tells us that we're >| only opening the tabular-layout if we click on a insetUrl in another >| cell then this is a different matter

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On 13-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >>| ??? I don't understand what you mean here. >> >> A double-open bug was reproted, you claim that the patch you checked >> in should fix this, and I wonder it got fixed for the original >> reporter as well.

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Juergen Vigna
On 13-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >| ??? I don't understand what you mean here. > > A double-open bug was reproted, you claim that the patch you checked > in should fix this, and I wonder it got fixed for the original > reporter as well. I fail to see the double open bug? What bugs are

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On 13-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> And that also helped the bug-reporters? > | ??? I don't understand what you mean here. A double-open bug was reproted, you claim that the patch you checked in should fix this, and I wonder it got fixed for

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Juergen Vigna
On 13-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > And that also helped the bug-reporters? ??? I don't understand what you mean here. Jug -- -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Italienallee 13/N Tel/Fa

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On 13-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>| On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 03:23:44PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote: >>> This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call for non highl

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Juergen Vigna
On 13-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >| On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 03:23:44PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote: >> >>> This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call >>> for non highly editable insets. >> >| Yes, works for me. >> >|

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 03:23:44PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote: > >> This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call >> for non highly editable insets. > | Yes, works for me. > | btw, the two-dialogs on right click bug is back *again*

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-13 Thread Juergen Vigna
On 11-May-2002 John Levon wrote: >> This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call >> for non highly editable insets. > > Yes, works for me. > > btw, the two-dialogs on right click bug is back *again* :( ??? Where? Jug -- -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-11 Thread John Levon
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 03:23:44PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote: > This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call > for non highly editable insets. Yes, works for me. btw, the two-dialogs on right click bug is back *again* :( john -- "So what you're saying is "screw th

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-10 Thread Juergen Vigna
On 10-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >| On 09-May-2002 Juergen Vigna wrote: >>> This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call >>> for non highly editable insets. >> >| This is a "real" bugfix! Comments please! > > I bel

Re: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-10 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On 09-May-2002 Juergen Vigna wrote: >> This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call >> for non highly editable insets. > | This is a "real" bugfix! Comments please! I belive it is correct, but could you get someone to test it

RE: PATCH: fix bug 387

2002-05-10 Thread Juergen Vigna
On 09-May-2002 Juergen Vigna wrote: > This patch fixes #387 as the insettext should not call the edit() call > for non highly editable insets. This is a "real" bugfix! Comments please! Jug -- -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Dr. Jürgen Vigna