Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>>>>>"Herbert" == Herbert Voss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>>>> > > Herbert> no, it's a problem now from the long wait ... anyway, my > Herbert> fault! > > Herbert> revert the whole last patch or try the attached > > I'd rather avoid to change gratuitously the file format. So I see three > possibilities: > > 1/ keep the patch, but write "lyx_size" in files. Then, when the > format really has to change for some reason, it will be tim to use > size_kind.
> > 2/ revert the patch (didn't it contain other useful stuff?) > > 3/ apply your new patch. This means that 1.2.0 will not be able to > read 1.3.0 files, for no good reason. > > I think I prefer 1/. However, this is your code (mostly), so I let you > decide what you prefer. the graphics part is extremely complicated in it's logic, from latex and from the lyx view, too. I am willing to give as much support as I am able to give for the latex part. but this is only possible when I have the same then cvs or vice-versa. So I would prefer 3/ and there should be no problem to prepare a patch for 1.2.1 to get the same behaviour, because 1.3.0 has no _new_ features which depends to the latex part of the graphics (calling the missing lyx-aspectratio a bug and the size_kind stuff bad value names). So let me know, if you want to upgrade 1.2.x, too. And when 1.3 should be released the small compatibility stuff can go into Dekels lyxconvert. it would anyway be better to have a 1.3.0 in let's say 4 weeks, because there are so much changes in 1.2.x that a go to 1.3 makes sense. Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
