Hello, I am just bringing this discussion over from lyx-users.
On 2010-09-27 00:15, "Pavel Sanda" <sa...@lyx.org> wrote: >>>> LyX's track changes plays very poorly with VCS in LyX 1.6.X and this is >>>> only >>>> partly solved in 2.0. >> >> See: >> >> http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/6058 >> >> And in particular my post (+patch) which tries to explain why what has been >> implemented for Lyx 2.0 is still fragile: >> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg153396.html > > yes i remember the thread. you unfortunately took too long hiatus and Vincent > disappeared meanwhile... ;) i will reopen the ticket with the comments above, > so there is still chance to get this into 2.0. i see also you didnt responded > to Andre's comments... I would like to have another go at fixing this bad interaction between track changes and version control systems. Basically means using a hash function of author email (+/- name) rather than an integer starting at 1 to identify the author of tracked changes. But I need a little help with practicalities 1) I have a patch set for 1.6.X which will no longer apply because Vincent (vfr) already contributed an alternative. I presume that I need to modify my patch to layer on top of his. 2) Is there a developer style guide posted anywhere? My code is algorithmically correct to the best of my knowledge, but I don't do a lot of C++/Qt and this was my first patch offered for LyX so a lot of the comments on my code were style issues. 3) How should lyx2lyx be handled in this case? I guess I need to layer a conversion from vfr's patch (format 369) to my proposal. Or if that file format was never a stable release can it be ignored? Many thanks for your help, Greg Jefferis. -- Gregory Jefferis, PhD Division of Neurobiology MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QH, UK. http://www2.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/group-leaders/h-to-m/g-jefferis http://www.neuroscience.cam.ac.uk/directory/profile.php?gsxej2 http://flybrain.stanford.edu
