> > This is my proposal, which can embed any file. The files will be in > > the bundle, and if they are extracted, they can only be extracted to > > the document directory. > > I am OK with that, if 'document directory' means 'a special directory > that only belongs to this document'.
Great. > > I was asking why do not you use $TEXINPUT so that you can include > > these images NOT using ../../images paths? If you can not do it for > > lyx, do not expect me to use it either. > > It is not useful for documents that we distribute, IMO. Using your approach, you *cannot* easily send our user's guide as a standalone file. That *is* a BIG problem although you do not see it this way. I have said that I have similar directory structure, and I do need to *single out* a document and send it bundled. > OK, you send me a 10G lyx file. I click OK on everything (because you > told me to do so), read the file, and when I decide that I do not need > it anymore I delete it. First, my implementation opens files in bundle-editing mode by default. There is no danger whatsoever in this mode. > A few days later, I notice that I cannot > install new programs on my machine. After a few hours of searching, I > find out that is is because of the file > /home/lasgoutt/myvideos/verynice/mynicevideo.mpg > that was somehow bundled with your file. Can't you see why I would be > annoyed? What is the cleaning procedure that you propose? This is a problem with your proposal as well, right?? Note that neither our proposal will write to myvideos/verynice unless user extract the .lyx file under myvideos. I mean, we do not write outside of document directory. > To me, locality of a document is a very important feature so that > people know what they copy and where it is. A file is a file, and it > is all there is to it. Again, I do not extract to anywhere outside of the document directory. Bo
