Re: Examples of integration between Lyx, Sage computations, and PDFLateX
The attachments on this thread have been posted to the wiki (thanks Christian):
http://wiki.lyx.org/Layouts/Modules/#toc7
http://wiki.lyx.org/uploads/Modules/Sage
Note that if you customize the sage.module file, you can load the
changes immediately by entering "layout-reload" in the minibuffer.
As Murat has done: I hereby grant permission to license my
contributions to the sage module for LyX under the GNU General Public
License, version 2 or later.
- Thomas
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Murat Yildizoglu wrote:
> Good idea, thanks a lot for the suggestion Xu. Here is my statement (I put
> the devel list as CC) :
>
> I hereby grant permission to license my contributions to the SAGE module for
> LyX under the GNU
> General Public Licence, version 2 or later.
>
> Murat Yildizoglu
>
>
> 2012/3/31 Xu Wang
>>
>> Dear Thomas
>>
>> Excellent news! Thank you for your continued work. I have not taken a fine
>> look at this yet, but I also use Ubuntu so it looks like it might be useful.
>>
>> I'm not sure but I think for your contributions to be used you have to
>> give permission explicitly. Look at this email:
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg161963.html
>> You can send something like that to the development list, lyx-devel
>>
>> And it could be a good idea for Murat to do the same.
>>
>> I'm not sure though.
>>
>> In any case, thank you for your continued work. I am appreciative. Xu
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Thomas Coffee
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Murat and Xu,
>>>
>>> I found your thread in the archives and did some further work on the
>>> LyX-SageTeX module that Murat posted previously.
>>>
>>> I fixed a few things that did not work for me in the version described
>>> earlier, and expanded the module specification to provide some
>>> additional conveniences for including literate Sage code in LyX
>>> documents. There's still much room for development and customization.
>>>
>>> The attachments comprise a set of files and a shell script "setup.sh"
>>> that should largely automate the configuration process on GNU/Linux
>>> systems.
>>>
>>> *** Help needed:
>>>
>>> For other interested users, I'd like to upload this to
>>> http://wiki.lyx.org/Layouts/Modules, but I get browser errors for
>>> links anywhere under the upload path wiki.lyx.org/ipfm. The page
>>> http://wiki.lyx.org/Site/AboutUploading also tells me I will need
>>> someone to tell me the upload password. Can anyone assist?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>> > Hi Xu,
>>> >
>>> > Thank you for your appreciation. I cannot advance anymore without any
>>> > help
>>> > from Lyx gurus.
>>> > I think I have extracted all the information I can from the help docs.
>>> > If I
>>> > get any answer to my questions, I can construct a little bit smarter
>>> > module
>>> > but the one we have now is already usable. With some supplementary
>>> > tricks
>>> > from the sagetex documentation and through manual executions of the
>>> > latex-sage-latex chain, it is possible to make a lot of computations.
>>> >
>>> > I was also very agreeably surprised that this module can be used for
>>> > conversion to HTML from LyX, with figures and all.
>>> >
>>> > I attach to this message the module in its actual stage and some
>>> > instruction for making the conversion chain functional. I hope this
>>> > would
>>> > already help some of you.
>>> >
>>> > As soon as I have more information, I will try to complete the module
>>> > file.
>>> >
>>> > Best regards,
>>> >
>>> > Murat
>>> >
>>> > 2011/10/31 Xu Wang
>>> >
>>> > > Dear Murat,
>>> > >
>>> > > This is great! I have been waiting for something like this for a long
>>> > > time. I also like the Sweave-like philosophy of this. It's more
>>> > > transparent
>>> > > and reproducible.
>>> > >
>>> > > I am looking forward to the final release with much excitement.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thank you for your work!
>>> > >
>>> > > Best,
>>> > >
>>> > > Xu
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Murat Yildizoglu
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Just another mail to correct a problem with the preceding Lyx file
>>> > >> (see
>>> > >> the new file attached, and the $ signs in ERT boxes, this is
>>> > >> connected with
>>> > >> the problem I describe below) and ask a question about insets again:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> What kind of Flex insets can be included in a math mode text? Is
>>> > >> this
>>> > >> possible at all? Especially in displayed equation where one would
>>> > >> like to
>>> > >> include results from SAge computations?
>>> > >> I cannot write the following in math mode in Lyx, putting the left
>>> > >> member
>>> > >> in a displayed equation and the right member in a sagecode inset
>>> > >> that would
>>> > >> be converted to the expression I give
>>> > >> (\sage{integral(x/(x^2+1),x,0,1))
>>> > >> \dfrac{\partial^{4}y}{\partial
>>> > >> x^{4}}=\sage{integral(x/(x^2+1),x,0,1)}
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I meet two problems:
>>> > >> 1/ I cannot insert a Flex:sagecomman
Re: Contribution to systematically advance through environments
John Carbone wrote: > I wished for a way to just have "Requirement" in the Environment choice > box and be able to cycle through the levels much like one can do with > the sections, with the tab key. Since this feature didn't exist, I > decided to implement it in a manner generic that I hope will be useful > to the project as a whole. Except for technical issues (I guess NextStyle needs increment of layout format, conversion routines, documentation) I'm afraid there are more problems WRT genericity of this solution. First, "to cycle through the levels much like one can do with the sections" -- we do more complex things (eg. sections->subsections involves subsections-> subsubsections transformation). The generic solution would perhaps use outline-in/out lfuns instead of creating new nextstyle lfun. Second, the generic solution seems also involve the same handling for different environments - at the end all our (sub(sub))sections should be implemented by NextStyle. Now, shall we hide (sub)subsection in the default state, or do we need yet anothe RC variable, etc... This doesn't mean stop for your patch if othersl find it useful, just to give you some feedback... Pavel
Re: [lyx/refs/heads/master] Merge branch 'master' of lyx:lyx
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> I know how to do it otherwise but is there some simple merge command which >> put the whole branch as a single commit into master without noticing >> others >> about the branch-history-mess in my local tree? > > (on branch master) > $ git merge myfeature --squash > $ git commit > > Ok, thanks. I tried to import it into wiki. Pavel
Re: [lyx/refs/heads/master] Merge branch 'master' of lyx:lyx
Op 2-4-2012 16:21, Pavel Sanda schreef: Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: You had made local commits onto your master branch. If you then do 'git pull'. It will fetch the commits from the master branch at the server and merge them with your local commits. Thanks for all you answers; started to push things into wiki, so we don't need to ask it again and again here (http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel/Git). Personally I really advice to always create a new branch to do your own development. Yes I know :) From some previous posts I extracted into wiki: git checkout -b myfeature ... edit something git commit -a git push origin myfeature:master The merge command you propose is: ... If the master branch at origin doesn't have new commits, this can be done without a merge. Otherwise you'll have to rebase your feature on top of master (on branch myfeature) $ git rebase master If we don't stick to the linear master branch idea, then you can first merge your branch into master: $ git checkout master $ git merge myfeature $ git push I suppose (but never really tried) that by default plain "git push" won't push any local branches unless (once?) explicitely sent via "git push origin myfeature:master". No, with the above notation, you push the commits in the branch myfeature to the master branch at origin. By default "git push" will only push branches that have a branch with the same name at the remote. The default is changing now though, to either 'current' or 'upstream'. You can specify it yourself with e.g., "git config push.default current". The latter will indeed by default push your branch myfeature to the remote master branch, if and only if the myfeature branch is set up to track origin/master. The following will create a new branch at the remote: $ git push origin myfeature Now "git push" will also automatically push your branch myfeature. I know how to do it otherwise but is there some simple merge command which put the whole branch as a single commit into master without noticing others about the branch-history-mess in my local tree? (on branch master) $ git merge myfeature --squash $ git commit Vincent
Re: [lyx/refs/heads/master] Merge branch 'master' of lyx:lyx
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > You had made local commits onto your master branch. If you then do 'git > pull'. It will fetch the commits from the master branch at the server and > merge them with your local commits. Thanks for all you answers; started to push things into wiki, so we don't need to ask it again and again here (http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel/Git). > Personally I really advice to always create a new branch to do your own > development. Yes I know :) >From some previous posts I extracted into wiki: git checkout -b myfeature ... edit something git commit -a git push origin myfeature:master The merge command you propose is: ... I suppose (but never really tried) that by default plain "git push" won't push any local branches unless (once?) explicitely sent via "git push origin myfeature:master". I know how to do it otherwise but is there some simple merge command which put the whole branch as a single commit into master without noticing others about the branch-history-mess in my local tree? Pavel
Re: 2.0.4svn...?
On 04/02/2012 05:41 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 02/04/12 09:41, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Richard Heck wrote: Anyone have a view about what we should call what used to be called 2.0.4svn? Why do you need one? To show in the about box. Just so that people can give a name to the thing And for bug reports. The "dev" suffix is good and should probably be used also for 2.0.1svn, though we probably don't want to have to change that now in trac. So I'll switch to 2.0.5dev, for the same reason, when 2.0.4 is released. Richard
Re: Wiki page editing
Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: > Hello, > > I'm willing to edit the web pages after 2.0.3 is out, but now when I try to > login nothing happens. Please try now and report if something does not work. Pavel
Re: 2.0.4svn...?
Le 02/04/12 09:41, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Richard Heck wrote: Anyone have a view about what we should call what used to be called 2.0.4svn? Why do you need one? To show in the about box. Just so that people can give a name to the thing, even though git lives in an alternate reality where everything could happen in any order (like release 2.0.5 before 2.0.4). JMarc
Re: 2.0.4svn...?
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Richard Heck wrote: > > Anyone have a view about what we should call what used to be called > 2.0.4svn? Why do you need one? With git, tags are real tags and not branches as with svn. So I'd recommend to keep developping in 2.0.x branch and tag it from time to time: tag 2.0.4test1 test it fix it tag 2.0.4test2 test it good to release tag 2.0.4 release the 2.0.4 tarball shall then checkout the 2.0.x branch at tag 2.0.4 Abdel.
Re: 2.0.4svn...?
Le 02/04/12 00:02, Richard Heck a écrit : Anyone have a view about what we should call what used to be called 2.0.4svn? 2.0.4dev? JMarc
