On 2010-10-23 16:40, "Richard Heck" <rgh...@comcast.net> wrote:
> BUT...perhaps we could avoid going forward by allowing LyX to calculate > the hash value. I'd guess that it is easy to check if we have a hash > value or not, right? If not, then we can calculate it. Maybe we need > such code, anyway, in case there's some corruption of the headers? OK that's what I was wondering. When I wrote my patch for LyX, I had it make a hash if one was missing. I can't quite remember what Vincent did - it might well be better to calculate the hash in LyX only. > Actually, is the hash value even stored in the LyX file? If so, why? The hash is stored in the file. The basic issue is that the change tracking code requires an int to identify every author associated with each change (rather than storing the author's name and email with each change). Then the header of the lyx file writes a line containing the Name1 email1 author_id1 Name2 email1 author_id2 ... The author_ids used to be serial numbers but this causes problems for version control systems when multiple authors use track changes. Vincent can confirm behaviour exactly (and so can I once I have compiled latest LyX 2.0) Best, Greg.
