justification in program insets

2011-02-05 Thread Jack Tanner
My document is full-justified, which I like. This means that my program listings (LyX 1.6.8) are also full-justified, but that makes no sense. Should I file a bug?

Re: Printer fonts in 2.0 HEAD

2011-02-05 Thread Guenter Milde
On 2011-02-03, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 03/02/2011 12:11, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit : >> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>> And a check for luatex version? This one can be done in configure.py in >>> a safe way. >> I don't think it's a matter of the luatex version. The fontspec >> version i

Re: I could use something like "Export LyX" option

2011-02-05 Thread Pavel Sanda
Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > no. after beta4 i want to move into more strict regimen > > restricting more to "fix bug #xxx" commits. > > > > > I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using > > > lyxpak.py to export may still be a good idea for 2.0. > > > > for sure i have no

Re: I could use something like "Export LyX" option

2011-02-05 Thread Abdelrazak Younes
On 05/02/2011 15:07, Richard Heck wrote: On 02/05/2011 06:51 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using lyxpak.py to export may still be a good idea for 2.0. for sure i have no problem including it in the tarball. If I'm not mistaken, it is

Re: theBufferList::getBuffer(filename, bool internal = false)

2011-02-05 Thread Tommaso Cucinotta
Il 05/02/2011 03:21, Tommaso Cucinotta ha scritto: you got it right, it is refactoring stuff, [...] [ I'm going to share the patch instead of committing, so u can decide; Here you go. Now I have all my small tests working, with F&R with char styles, par styles, reg exps, and with and without a

Re: lyxpak.py as "Bundler"

2011-02-05 Thread Richard Heck
On 02/05/2011 09:30 AM, Kornel wrote: Am Samstag, 5. Februar 2011 schrieb Richard Heck: > On 02/05/2011 07:56 AM, Kornel wrote: > > > Anyone object to including lyxpak.py as a "Packed LyX File" exporter? I > > > > > > know there are reasons to want a different sort of bundled format---I

Re: lyxpak.py as "Bundler"

2011-02-05 Thread Kornel
Am Samstag, 5. Februar 2011 schrieb Richard Heck: > On 02/05/2011 07:56 AM, Kornel wrote: > > > Anyone object to including lyxpak.py as a "Packed LyX File" exporter? I > > > > > > know there are reasons to want a different sort of bundled format---I > > > > > > worked on that myself a while ago.

Re: LyX 1.6.9

2011-02-05 Thread BH
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Stephan Witt wrote: >> I hope you're interested in success stories too :-) > > Sure. Primarily :-) > >> I built the package, used it to open and preview the users guide. >> No problems here at all on Mac OS X. Works for me on OS X, too.

Re: lyxpak.py as "Bundler"

2011-02-05 Thread Richard Heck
On 02/05/2011 07:56 AM, Kornel wrote: > Anyone object to including lyxpak.py as a "Packed LyX File" exporter? I > know there are reasons to want a different sort of bundled format---I > worked on that myself a while ago. But for now, this works, and it is > something a LOT of people want. >

Re: I could use something like "Export LyX" option

2011-02-05 Thread Richard Heck
On 02/05/2011 06:51 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using lyxpak.py to export may still be a good idea for 2.0. for sure i have no problem including it in the tarball. If I'm not mistaken, it is already in the tarball. I don't think it

Re: lyxpak.py as "Bundler"

2011-02-05 Thread Kornel
Am Freitag, 4. Februar 2011 schrieb Richard Heck: > On 02/04/2011 02:42 PM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > > On 04/02/2011 18:50, Richard Heck wrote: > >> Serious question: Why don't we include this as a LyX-->Packed LyX > >> converter? It's not perfect, but it does work, and people are forever > >> wa

Re: LyX 1.6.9

2011-02-05 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Stephan Witt wrote: > I hope you're interested in success stories too :-) Sure. Primarily :-) > I built the package, used it to open and preview the users guide. > No problems here at all on Mac OS X. Great. Jürgen

Re: LyX 1.6.9

2011-02-05 Thread Stephan Witt
Am 05.02.2011 um 10:16 schrieb Jürgen Spitzmüller: > I've uploaded tarballs here: > > ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-1.6.9.tar.gz > ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-1.6.9.tar.bz2 > > Please test and use these if you want to contribute binaries. > > I plan to release on Monda

Re: I could use something like "Export LyX" option

2011-02-05 Thread Enrico Forestieri
I'm breaking my resolution to not interfer in this discussion, but I could not resist. However, this will be my first and last post on the subject. On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 02:32:20AM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Richard Heck wrote: > > On 02/04/2011 05:23 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > >> > >

Re: theBufferList::getBuffer(filename, bool internal = false)

2011-02-05 Thread Pavel Sanda
Tommaso Cucinotta wrote: > I cannot recommend git for the sole reason that I cannot use it. > It is much more complex than other tools (svn), and most of the > times I don't need those additional cool features with off-line > commits, stash, pull/push, checkout/branch and the like. After years > of

LyX 1.6.9

2011-02-05 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
I've uploaded tarballs here: ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-1.6.9.tar.gz ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-1.6.9.tar.bz2 Please test and use these if you want to contribute binaries. I plan to release on Monday, if I get no bad report. Jürgen

Branch frozen

2011-02-05 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
I'm setting up LyX 1.6.9. Thanks, Jürgen