Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
But 1.6 will bring 45 new bugs:
http://tinyurl.com/5uyjpz
Not all of them are actually new. Some are also in branch.
If you know of any please set the version to 1.5.5.
Overall I personnally think this is a good enough ratio
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> But 1.6 will bring 45 new bugs:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/5uyjpz
Not all of them are actually new. Some are also in branch.
> Overall I personnally think this is a good enough ratio and, provided
> that major bugs are fixed, 1.6 is not very far away, IMHO 9 bugs to be
> ex
At this point and when compared to previous version 1.6 will fix 141
bugs (those not marked with fixedintrunk):
http://tinyurl.com/6dbzsm
This of course does not count all the bugs that were backported to 1.5.x
during the development phase.
But 1.6 will bring 45 new bugs:
http://tinyurl.com
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Do we have a list of such bugs? They should be marked as blocker so that
> they appear in this list:
Actually, the only really crucial one is this:
http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4927
Another candidate is this:
http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4812
(coul
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> José Matos wrote:
>>
>>> That is fair, so the criteria to change from beta to rc is the
>>> (in)existence of data loss bugs?
>>>
>>
>> I'd say so.
>>
>
> Do we have a list of such bugs? They should be marked as blocker so that
> th
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> José Matos wrote:
> > That is fair, so the criteria to change from beta to rc is the
> > (in)existence of data loss bugs?
>
> I'd say so.
i added it here http://www.lyx.org/VersioningSystem
pavel
Abe Lau wrote:
Trying out lyx 1.6.0beta3 (texlive-latex-2007) on Gentoo Linux, with the
option "Load opened files from last session", the order of files in the tabs
are not preserved but all alphabetically sorted. I suppose preserving the
tab order would be a good idea, as what version 1.5 did a
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
José Matos wrote:
That is fair, so the criteria to change from beta to rc is the
(in)existence of data loss bugs?
I'd say so.
Do we have a list of such bugs? They should be marked as blocker so that
they appear in this list:
http://tinyurl.com/5au5uz
Trying out lyx 1.6.0beta3 (texlive-latex-2007) on Gentoo Linux, with the
option "Load opened files from last session", the order of files in the tabs
are not preserved but all alphabetically sorted. I suppose preserving the
tab order would be a good idea, as what version 1.5 did as I remember.
An
José Matos wrote:
> That is fair, so the criteria to change from beta to rc is the
> (in)existence of data loss bugs?
I'd say so.
> Nevertheless we are now in bug fix mode only, I know this is consensual I
> am just stating it explicitly. :-)
This is a very good decision.
Jürgen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
No, the trailing slash only. The problem was that we add a slash
unconditionally as you correctly guessed. But this change is good
anyway as we are now inline with other platforms (/tmp doesn't have a
trailing slash).
Abe Lau wrote:
> should I still create a bug report? as Abdelrazak Younes said he is going to
> fix it immediately. I'm new, so please pardon me for the question if it's
> trivial. Thanks for all the great work!
fixed http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/25443
pavel
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, the trailing slash only. The problem was that we add a slash
> unconditionally as you correctly guessed. But this change is good
> anyway as we are now inline with other platforms (/tmp doesn't have a
> trailing slash).
This is bad. We should no
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Author: younes
Date: Fri Jul 4 14:28:55 2008
New Revision: 25442
URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/25442
Log:
Remove double slash in system temporary path.
So the double slash was given by windows itself??
No, the trail
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Abe Lau wrote:
>
>> I have been trying out 1.6.0beta3 (texlive-latex-2007) on Gentoo Linux and
>> found that adding a new "Numbered formula" using "Insert->Math" only
>> creates
>> a non-numbered formula. I cannot fin
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
convert: unable to open image
png:C:/Users/abdel/AppData/Local/Temp/lyx_tmpdir18088a16052/lyx_tmpbuf1/2C__devel_lyx_trunk_lib_images_undo.png':
Invalid argument.
convert: missing an image filename
eps:C:/Users/abdel/Ap
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> src/Buffer.cpp: return d->filename.onlyPath().absFilename() + "/";
>>
> This one doesn't seem to be erroneous because FileName::onlyPath()
> seems to be sane.
I think we should not have to think about it. I agree that using
addName is tiresome,
On Friday 04 July 2008 11:16:07 Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> I agree. Most notably, we have _dataloss_ bugs. I think those should be
> fixed before we release something tagged _release candidate_.
That is fair, so the criteria to change from beta to rc is the (in)existence
of data loss bugs?
Neve
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> convert: unable to open image
> png:C:/Users/abdel/AppData/Local/Temp/lyx_tmpdir18088a16052/lyx_tmpbuf1/2C__devel_lyx_trunk_lib_images_undo.png':
> Invalid argument.
> convert: missing an image filename
> eps:C:/Users/abdel/AppData/Local/Temp/lyx_tmp
Abe Lau wrote:
I have been trying out 1.6.0beta3 (texlive-latex-2007) on Gentoo Linux and
found that adding a new "Numbered formula" using "Insert->Math" only creates
a non-numbered formula. I cannot find any report from bugzilla (I thought
it would be there). Is it some mis-configurations of m
Abe Lau wrote:
> Is it some mis-configurations of my own lyx, or can
> anyone confirm this?
this is bug, which i'll fix immediately.
pavel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Author: younes
> Date: Fri Jul 4 14:28:55 2008
> New Revision: 25442
>
> URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/25442
> Log:
> Remove double slash in system temporary path.
So the double slash was given by windows itself??
> + string tmp = to_utf8(from_local8bit(
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
This is the message I get when I try to compile the Tutorial to dvi:
convert: unable to open image
png:C:/Users/abdel/AppData/Local/Temp//lyx_tmpdir13444a15356/lyx_tmpbuf2/20C__devel_lyx_trunk_lib_images_math_frac.png
I have been trying out 1.6.0beta3 (texlive-latex-2007) on Gentoo Linux and
found that adding a new "Numbered formula" using "Insert->Math" only creates
a non-numbered formula. I cannot find any report from bugzilla (I thought
it would be there). Is it some mis-configurations of my own lyx, or can
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is the message I get when I try to compile the Tutorial to dvi:
>
> convert: unable to open image
> png:C:/Users/abdel/AppData/Local/Temp//lyx_tmpdir13444a15356/lyx_tmpbuf2/20C__devel_lyx_trunk_lib_images_math_frac.png':
> Invalid argument.
>
>
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
This is the message I get when I try to compile the Tutorial to dvi:
convert: unable to open image
`png:C:/Users/abdel/AppData/Local/Temp//lyx_tmpdir13444a15356/lyx_tmpbuf2/20C__devel_lyx_trunk_lib_images_math_frac.png':
Invalid argument.
I guess the problem comes fr
This is the message I get when I try to compile the Tutorial to dvi:
convert: unable to open image
`png:C:/Users/abdel/AppData/Local/Temp//lyx_tmpdir13444a15356/lyx_tmpbuf2/20C__devel_lyx_trunk_lib_images_math_frac.png':
Invalid argument.
I guess the problem comes from the double // after 'Te
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
What I do not quite understand, is why the second window should have a
size different from the first one's?
As I said, I don't really care. But what about the third? Should it
have the same size as the curre
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What I do not quite understand, is why the second window should have a
>> size different from the first one's?
>>
> As I said, I don't really care. But what about the third? Should it
> have the same size as the current window or as the first one
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But there is no way to decide what is the size of these new windows,
then?
Right, we could add this information to "default.ui" instead of
hardcoding it with a line like this:
geometry 690 510 50 50
What
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> But there is no way to decide what is the size of these new windows,
>> then?
>>
> Right, we could add this information to "default.ui" instead of
> hardcoding it with a line like this:
>
> geometry 690 510 50 50
What I do not quite understand, i
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Another thing I never get to ask: when I open LyX, the window has the
size kept in session file. Fine. But now, when I create a new window,
I get another default size. Is there a reason for that?
That seemed a s
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Another thing I never get to ask: when I open LyX, the window has the
>> size kept in session file. Fine. But now, when I create a new window,
>> I get another default size. Is there a reason for that?
>
> That seemed a sane default behaviour to me.
Pavel Sanda wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
speaking about 'only bugfixes' do you still plan to change the underlying
key handling ?
That would just be a refactoring of the key handling support functions so
this is still bugfixing in my definition.
in terms of stability the
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
btw Abdel, what are your plans wrt http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4888
?
Fix it when I find the time :-)
Another thing I never get to ask: when I open LyX, the window has the
size kept in se
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> btw Abdel, what are your plans wrt
>> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4888 ?
>>
>
> Fix it when I find the time :-)
Another thing I never get to ask: when I open LyX, the window has the
size kept in session file. Fine. But now, when I c
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Agreed for 'only bugfixes'. But as for tagging it rc1 I am not sure as
> we have a number of major and critical bugs still, 14 to be exact:
>
> *http://tinyurl.com/5au5uz
I agree. Most notably, we have _dataloss_ bugs. I think those should be fixed
before we release som
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> speaking about 'only bugfixes' do you still plan to change the underlying
>> key handling ?
>>
> That would just be a refactoring of the key handling support functions so
> this is still bugfixing in my definition.
in terms of stability the refactoring or 'shuffle
Pavel Sanda wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
José Matos wrote:
Hi,
I think that we are ready to go with the first rc1. So that means that
from now on no more features are allowed, only bugfixes.
Agreed for 'only bugfixes'. But as for tagging it rc1 I am not sure as we
have a
For information: considering that the messages were just sitting there
using 30M+ of disk space for nothing, I disabled mail delivery of
cvs-log for the mailboxes that are clearly not used. The mails have
been moved to the homedirs of the respective users.
The users concerned are: uwestoehr, bpen
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> José Matos wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I think that we are ready to go with the first rc1. So that means that
>> from now on no more features are allowed, only bugfixes.
>>
>
> Agreed for 'only bugfixes'. But as for tagging it rc1 I am not sure as we
> have a number of maj
José Matos wrote:
Hi,
I think that we are ready to go with the first rc1. So that means that from
now on no more features are allowed, only bugfixes.
Agreed for 'only bugfixes'. But as for tagging it rc1 I am not sure as
we have a number of major and critical bugs still, 14 to be exact:
Hi,
I think that we are ready to go with the first rc1. So that means that
from
now on no more features are allowed, only bugfixes.
I propose to release rc1 next Tuesday. Enjoy the weekend, and the
holiday if
you are American, and let us announce the best lyx to date. ;-)
--
Jürgen Spitzmüller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> > I knew you would say this and applied in advance.
>>
>> So, why did you ask?
>
> Without asking, how could I have read your mind?
I am not going to answer, because I know that you already found out.
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > I knew you would say this and applied in advance.
>
> So, why did you ask?
Without asking, how could I have read your mind?
Jürgen
Jürgen Spitzmüller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> > BTW, speaking of ligatures, can I apply the attached patch? IMO the
>> > current code is plain wrong.
>>
>> Definitely yes.
>
> I knew you would say this and applied in advance.
So, why did you ask?
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > BTW, speaking of ligatures, can I apply the attached patch? IMO the
> > current code is plain wrong.
>
> Definitely yes.
I knew you would say this and applied in advance.
Jürgen
Jürgen Spitzmüller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW, speaking of ligatures, can I apply the attached patch? IMO the current
> code is plain wrong.
Definitely yes.
JMarc
48 matches
Mail list logo
