Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 06:24:40AM +, Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2017-09-06, Richard Heck wrote: > > On 09/06/2017 02:08 AM, Anders Ekberg wrote: > > >> Tested briefly on Mac latest OS and fresh TeX installation. Only > >> problem was that the welcome document complains about unknown image >

Re: Document class for a lecture manuscript

2017-09-10 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 06:00:39PM +0200, jezZiFeR wrote: > Dear Rich, dear all, > > meanwhile I startet trying to use the KOMA-script article class. For me it is > not that easy to search for the proper places in the documentation because it > exists only in English and is very long. I would

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Am Sonntag, den 10.09.2017, 13:54 +0200 schrieb Murat Yildizoglu: > To my experience, Lyx generates now this error when you have inserted > a bibliography in the document but you do not have any citation in > the document. This check is a good idea, but it should generate a > warning instead of an

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Murat Yildizoglu
To my experience, Lyx generates now this error when you have inserted a bibliography in the document but you do not have any citation in the document. This check is a good idea, but it should generate a warning instead of an error IMHO. Murat Le 10 sept. 2017 à 07:47 +0200, racoon

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Am Sonntag, den 10.09.2017, 11:14 +0200 schrieb racoon: > On 10.09.2017 10:12, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > Yes, it would be nice to document issues there. Note that the > > workaround was never officially supported, so the transition might > > entails some caveats (although not too much

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread racoon
On 10.09.2017 10:12, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Yes, it would be nice to document issues there. Note that the workaround was never officially supported, so the transition might entails some caveats (although not too much hopefully). I added what I did for the transition:

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Am Sonntag, den 10.09.2017, 10:36 +0200 schrieb racoon: > I noticed that the BibTex Bibliography dialog's Content field is > blank > by default. Either this represents some "not set" value but then > this > should be explicit and an option in the drop down menu, or "all > cited > references"

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Am Sonntag, den 10.09.2017, 10:36 +0200 schrieb racoon: > By the way the usage of upper case is inconsistent. Either the T > should > be lower or the l and x upper case. There is no upper case usage in > Document Settings > Bibliography for Biblatex but for BibTeX... Thats's because Biblatex is

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread racoon
On 10.09.2017 10:12, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Am Sonntag, den 10.09.2017, 07:49 +0200 schrieb racoon: On 09.09.2017 15:32, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Am Samstag, den 09.09.2017, 11:31 +0200 schrieb racoon: I have a document that works fine in 2.2 but generates an error in 2.3 "I found no

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Am Sonntag, den 10.09.2017, 09:53 +0200 schrieb racoon: > On 10.09.2017 07:49, racoon wrote: > > On 09.09.2017 15:32, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > > You have to change it in order to use the native support. But you > > > still > > > should be able to continue with the workaround. > > > > Maybe

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Am Sonntag, den 10.09.2017, 07:49 +0200 schrieb racoon: > On 09.09.2017 15:32, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 09.09.2017, 11:31 +0200 schrieb racoon: > > > I have a document that works fine in 2.2 but generates an error > > > in > > > 2.3 > > > > > > "I found no \citation

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread racoon
On 10.09.2017 07:49, racoon wrote: On 09.09.2017 15:32, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: You have to change it in order to use the native support. But you still should be able to continue with the workaround. Maybe it would be nice to have a guide how to get from [1] to native support at [1]. Is

Re: Have you tested 2.3.0beta1?

2017-09-10 Thread racoon
On 06.09.2017 01:25, Scott Kostyshak wrote: I have not seen many bugs that have been reported regarding 2.3.0beta1. I would like to know whether this means that 2.3.0beta1 can be considered stable, which is what I believe, or whether it is just that not many people have tested it and that is why