2012/5/2 Richard Heck :
> So perhaps we can decide how to handle this. Let's say you've got
> dir1/file.bst and also dir2/file.bst. We display them that way. Now suppose
> someone chooses one of them. Should we automatically insert that partial
> path? Or should we, as Jurgen suggested, merely offe
From: Richard Heck [rgh...@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 5:39 PM
>So perhaps we can decide how to handle this. Let's say you've got
>dir1/file.bst and also dir2/file.bst. We display them that way. Now
>suppose someone chooses one of them. Should we automatically insert that
>partial p
On 05/02/2012 04:57 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 07:44:00PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
2012/5/2 Richard Heck:
No, the idea would be to use the full path only when it was needed to
disambiguate. I.e., if you have to bst files in your tree with the same
name. The pr
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 07:44:00PM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> 2012/5/2 Richard Heck :
> > No, the idea would be to use the full path only when it was needed to
> > disambiguate. I.e., if you have to bst files in your tree with the same
> > name. The problem, not that it's a huge one, is th
2012/5/2 Richard Heck :
> No, the idea would be to use the full path only when it was needed to
> disambiguate. I.e., if you have to bst files in your tree with the same
> name. The problem, not that it's a huge one, is that we list both files in
> the dialog, but you get the same result whichever
On 05/02/2012 09:44 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
On 05/02/2012 03:20 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 2-5-2012 9:06, Pavel Sanda schreef:
Richard, thanks for the diffs!
Do you have control over the content?
If yes I would propose two nitpicks:
a) to drop the first part whic
For anyone wondering, ignore this. Mistake in the script.
On 05/02/2012 11:28 AM, Richard Heck wrote:
# The branch, 2.0.x, has been updated
This update added new revisions after undoing existing revisions. That is
to say, the old revision is not a strict subset of the new revision. Thi
On 05/02/2012 10:07 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
2012/5/2 Richard Heck:
Do you mean give the full path to \bibliographystyle{} as I talked about
above or just show the full path to the user like what tools
Tex information does when the check box is checked.
The first. The downside, of course,
2012/5/2 Richard Heck :
> Do you mean give the full path to \bibliographystyle{} as I talked about
> above or just show the full path to the user like what tools
> Tex information does when the check box is checked.
>
> The first. The downside, of course, is that this is much less portable.
If thi
Richard Heck wrote:
> On 05/02/2012 03:20 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> Op 2-5-2012 9:06, Pavel Sanda schreef:
>>> Richard, thanks for the diffs!
>>>
>>> Do you have control over the content?
>>> If yes I would propose two nitpicks:
>>>
>>> a) to drop the first part which brings no interesti
On 05/02/2012 03:20 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 2-5-2012 9:06, Pavel Sanda schreef:
Richard, thanks for the diffs!
Do you have control over the content?
If yes I would propose two nitpicks:
a) to drop the first part which brings no interesting info and occupy
space:
The branch, ma
On 05/01/2012 05:06 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
*From:* Richard Heck [rgh...@comcast.net]
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 01, 2012 1:02 PM
>It certainly does seem misleading to offer the user two choices that
do the same thing. But of course there
>could be cases where you had two bst files with the same n
Le 29/04/2012 14:13, Vincent van Ravesteijn a écrit :
I think it is a bug. I would vote for disabling the LFUN when the
languages are the same. This will make it possible for the reporter to
define: "command-alternatives language hebrew; language english" to toggle.
I especially object to introd
Op 2-5-2012 9:06, Pavel Sanda schreef:
Richard, thanks for the diffs!
Do you have control over the content?
If yes I would propose two nitpicks:
a) to drop the first part which brings no interesting info and occupy space:
The branch, master has been updated
via d2acacedf915b825674079
Richard, thanks for the diffs!
Do you have control over the content?
If yes I would propose two nitpicks:
a) to drop the first part which brings no interesting info and occupy space:
> The branch, master has been updated
>via d2acacedf915b825674079f5ef38abb215188d54 (commit)
> fro
15 matches
Mail list logo
