On 31/10/2010 23:08, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
No, but note that if we do not manage to solve the tabular issues with
multirow before 2.0 (which is not unlikely), I will vote for
deactivating
multirow support. We cannot ship a defect feature.
I'm not responsible for the new tabular Apply/OK scheme. As you say,
the problem lies within this scheme, we need to revert this scheme not
aprticular table feature. We have much more new table features that
suffer from this scheme, see
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/6997
I committed the multirow feature before the Apply scheme was
introduced and are disappointed that you see me guilty that multirow
doesn't work yet perfectly with this scheme.
Here we are again Uwe... Your code was full of bugs or ready to disclose
bugs and approximations, if it worked for you it was most likely by
chance; without the work or Edwin, myself and others I guess it would
have been reverted already. I really appreciate your documentation work
Uwe but if you want to code, pretty please accept the responsibilities
that comes with coding.
> But I've to admit, I agree more with Jürgen. Currently I cannot work
on the
> buffer-info of VCS anymore because the InsetInfo dialog doesn't work
anymore because of the
> ASSERTs.
It seems that we have a general problem of getting the code
stabilized. Wouldn't it therefore be better to postpone things like
the migration of dialogs to InsetParamsDialog until the current dialog
issues are sorted out?
Oh, I am only trying to offer a consistent look&feel for LyX-2.0, that's
all. But I don't think I destabilize the code a lot... At least I know I
can fix things in case I break them. I can stop this development of
course if Pavel asks me to.
Abdel.
