Am 30.01.2016 um 10:40 schrieb Georg Baum:
I was arguing against this but the majority decided to go that way. But
nothing happened.
What did you expect to happen?
Well, a democratic decision was made and I of course accepted this. But
then nothing else happened. I expected something some action. for example
- we run a script every month that checks if a document class was
changed at CTAN and at the homepages of the scientific journals. (I can
imagine that writing such a script would be fun for some of our developers.)
- If it reports a change, we check if our template and layout file is
still usable with the changed document class
- if a change is necessary, we release and announce it at lyx.org
It is OK for me when we decide for another way but it is not OK for me
that we discuss this since years without any improvement for the users.
We now have the situation again:
- our AGUTeX support is useless
- our ACM siggraph support is useless in LyX 2.1.x
Here we disagree.
Then please tell me how I should submit a paper to an ACM siggraph
conference with LyX 2.1.4.
Nobody said that we do not need a layout file for the current version. Scott
said said he appreciates the work you did on the new layout file, and I do
that as well.
That is not the pint. The point is that one cannot use LyX for AGUTeX
since about 7 months and we were not aware of and did nothing. I miss a
QA. My experience is that most LyX users (e.g. my former students) check
only once if they could use it for a task. If not, they will use another
program. I mean, when I had to submit a paper to IOP I only had one day.
The layout in LyX did not work and I had to use Word.
As a developer I wrote a new layout after I submitted my paper. Every
day we are surrounded by deadlines and I cannot imagine that a user has
time to fiddle around with layout files.
Therefore we should consider to publish updated layout files at lyx.org
as standalone file and announce them in the news. The user can then
download the layout and use it immediately - no matter when we release a
new LyX.
We can discuss this, but it is also very easy to provide a layout file for
the new version in parallel to the old one. For example, I would very likely
give a +1 to a patch that renames the old layout file to a different name,
updates the one with the generic name to the current version (as you did
it), and a lyx2lyx step that simply changes the document class to the new
name of the old layout file for old documents. This would even be less work
(no real lyx2lyx code needed).
Would in principle be OK but I did not yet fully understand in detail
what you want. To clarify it, let's try this out for ACM siggraph and
AGUTeX for LyX 2.1.x. What can/should I do right now? Could you propose
a step by step instruction?
thanks and regards
Uwe
