Am Sonntag, 31. Januar 2016 um 11:49:56, schrieb Georg Baum <georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de> > Guenter Milde wrote: > > > On 2016-01-30, Kornel Benko wrote: > >> Am Samstag, 30. Januar 2016 um 10:40:23, schrieb Georg Baum > >> <georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de> > > > >>> 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). > > > > > >> +1 to start of versioned layout files. Still a problem remains. If a > >> user does not have the new version installed, he is forced to change > >> his original lyx files to use the renamed layout. > > I suggested to do this renaming automatically in lyx2lyx.
Hm, OK, but this change is only partly dependent on lyx version. What matters
is the tex + layout combination.
Making the renaming in lyx2lyx seems therefore problematic.
Having a script to easy convert old lyx-files to use the new (or old) layout
would be good, but it should
be under user control IMHO.
> > +1 for versioned layout files from mee, too.
> >
> > +0 for using the old/generic name for the new version, if this works
> > out
> > of the box with unchanged old documents.
> >
> > -1 for re-using the old name, if there is manual editing of the LyX
> > source required (as I understood is the case for ACM-siggraph).
>
> This is the current situation. lyx2lyx deletes contents from the file and
> then requires the user to do manual changes in addition.
>
>
> Georg
Kornel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
