Re: Latest pre-release version

On 2/19/06, Daniel Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've seen mention of a 1.4.0pre5 in this group and was wondering if the > 1.4.0pre3 version mentioned on the LyX website is still the most recent > snapshot release. I ask this because 1.4.0pre3 is the latest LyX release > with a Gentoo ebuild

Latest pre-release version

I've seen mention of a 1.4.0pre5 in this group and was wondering if the 1.4.0pre3 version mentioned on the LyX website is still the most recent snapshot release. I ask this because 1.4.0pre3 is the latest LyX release with a Gentoo ebuild and I would like to update this (if, indeed, it needs updatin

Re: [PATCH] Speedup paragraph insertion/removal (a.k.a ParagraphList Rewrite)

Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Angus, I did removed the "for_each" methods but I let the inner class > iterator and const_iterator because they could be useful in the future. > Beside that they provide already "operator+=". I am still open on that > issue. I am completely relax

Re: About bugs targeted at 1.4.1

On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 01:03:51AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 04:25:01PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | > You see, I don't know of any critical bugs as of now. > | > | So why is 1.4.0 not yet released? > > Be

Re: Profiling lyx 1.4.0cvs

On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 06:11:56PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Wondering what's wrong with the others, or with me. > > Given your observations, I suspect that the others are all using the g++ > super-safe iterators; they have to be explicitly turned

[PATCH] Speedup paragraph insertion/removal (a.k.a ParagraphList Rewrite)

Guys, I have tested this new approach pretty extensively: - opened all my lyx documents+lyx help doc - played with them, added/erased paragraph randomly, - cut/copy/past large selection, math, graphics, - undo/redo, export to latex, export to text. So far, everything seems fine. What else should

Re: Profiling lyx 1.4.0cvs

Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Wondering what's wrong with the others, or with me. Given your observations, I suspect that the others are all using the g++ super-safe iterators; they have to be explicitly turned off when configuring the build. Angus

Re: [Bug 2207] Pasted text is not considered as change

Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > That's why I said that primarily we have a project management problem. | > We publish one pre-release after the other but we don't dare to submit | > patches that have been tested. That's just absurd. | | My personal opinion is that 1.4.0 shoul

Re: [Bug 2207] Pasted text is not considered as change

Michael Gerz wrote: > You are right, of course. But I don't like to spend time on patches if > they are to be applied only in a few months. This must also be > frustrating for the patch developers. I understand your frustration. And of course I'm looking forward to post-1.4.0, when some of these

Re: [Bug 2207] Pasted text is not considered as change

Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: If nobody tests it, it won't be applied, neither now, nor after 1.4.0 or whenever. If I don't get feedback whether proposed fixes work or not, I cannot continue bugfixing (because I don't want to have too much unclear changes in my tree). You are right, of course

Re: Profiling lyx 1.4.0cvs

On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 04:02:14PM +, Bartek Kostrzewa wrote: > Out of interest I've compiled lyx 1.4.0cvs adding gprof and did some > profiling to see why the scrolling was so slow in the qt frontend (and > it is horribly slow, the gtk frontend is MUCH faster (but I guess also > much less comp

Re: [Bug 2207] Pasted text is not considered as change

Michael Gerz wrote: > Does it make sense for me to test patches at this stage? If nobody tests it, it won't be applied, neither now, nor after 1.4.0 or whenever. If I don't get feedback whether proposed fixes work or not, I cannot continue bugfixing (because I don't want to have too much unclear

Re: [Bug 2207] Pasted text is not considered as change

Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | A little bit frustrated, As long it is just a little. -- Lgb

Re: About bugs targeted at 1.4.1

Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Is it to say that you will not allow the changes I've planned in my TODO list about ParagrahList in th 1.5svn timeframe for example? Andre> I think you can be pretty confident th

Re: [Bug 2207] Pasted text is not considered as change

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I attach the described fix nevertheless. Michael. maybe you find the time to stress test this. I didn't find any side effects, but I didn't test really hard. Cynical question: Does it make sense for me to test patches at this stage? There are several other patches w

Re: [Patch] multi-paragraph change tracking (Re: Baywatch doesn't repond)

Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 11:12:17PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote: | > On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 09:48:23PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: | > >7240 poenitz Jul 04 2003 BRANCH_NOUPDATE/ | > | > Could be removed. It basically is in 1.4. | > |

Re: Bugs in LyX140

John Burgess wrote: (1) The tab at lower right in the LyX window has only \/ in root, but has both ^ and \/ in $HOME. Why not have both with both? Could you please describe the problem in more detail? I don't understand what is going wrong. (2) LyX loads both the IEEE and the revtex4

[Tests] bug fixes 2251, 2217

On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 06:59:54PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Martin> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 11:47:54PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > Martin> wrote: ... > > Martin> Bugs that need more discussion (ugly/tentative/special-

Re: [Patch] multi-paragraph change tracking (Re: Baywatch doesn't repond)

On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 11:12:17PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 09:48:23PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: > >7240 poenitz Jul 04 2003 BRANCH_NOUPDATE/ > > Could be removed. It basically is in 1.4. > > Andre' I removed it. - Martin pgprAz3z1ykhB.pgp Des

Re: About bugs targeted at 1.4.1

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Is it to say that you will not allow the changes I've planned in my TODO list about ParagrahList in th 1.5svn timeframe for example? Andre> I think you can be pretty confident that the ParagraphList will Andr

Re: [patch] fix fix for bug 2192

Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Am Samstag, 18. Februar 2006 01:06 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes: | > Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | OK to go in? | > | > yes | > | > But you need to get people to test this... | | If you insist... | Note that the old patch was tested (i

Re: [patch] fix fix for bug 2192

Am Samstag, 18. Februar 2006 01:06 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes: > Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | OK to go in? > > yes > > But you need to get people to test this... If you insist... Note that the old patch was tested (it worked, but with unnecessary conversions), and this patch w

Re: About bugs targeted at 1.4.1

> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Is it to say that you will not allow the changes I've planned in my >> TODO list about ParagrahList in th 1.5svn timeframe for example? Andre> I think you can be pretty confident that the ParagraphList will Andre> go into 1.5. And _I_