Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 10:21:52PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
>
>> I'd really like to wait for the final updates for pt_PT and pt_BR for RC1
>> if possible.
>
> OK we'll wait.
Thank you very much. The brazialian translation is OK now (but it turned out
that a string reme
Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 08:45:17AM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
>
>> For the other patch (acmsiggraph.layout with incompatible version but
>> same cls file name), I would wait for an agreement whether to update the
>> layout (file format change needed) or add a new one. My
On 04/04/2016 11:23 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 08:45:17AM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
>
>> For the other patch (acmsiggraph.layout with incompatible version but same
>> cls file name), I would wait for an agreement whether to update the layout
>> (file format change need
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 08:45:17AM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
> For the other patch (acmsiggraph.layout with incompatible version but
> same cls file name), I would wait for an agreement whether to update the
> layout (file format change needed) or add a new one. My last preference
> is an update
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 10:29:23PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> Guenter Milde wrote:
>
> > The patch is ready.
> >
> > This is the "new layout for new cls file name" case, similar to what we
> > already have for, e.g. scrltr2.
> >
> > As it looks like we all agree that a new layout does *not* requ
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 03:17:01AM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Am 01.04.2016 um 22:33 schrieb Georg Baum:
>
> >Note that Peter made some further tests and found out that the merged build
> >does not fix the crash, but only hides it:
> >http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/10009
>
> Yes, and Peter already
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 10:21:52PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> I'd really like to wait for the final updates for pt_PT and pt_BR for RC1 if
> possible.
OK we'll wait.
> The good news is that the percentage of reviewed strings in 2.2.0 will be
> higher than in 2.1.0.
That is good news indeed.
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:15:10AM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Am 29.03.2016 um 23:49 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
>
> >Uwe, this commit introduced two \origin tags. I removed the unavailable
> >one at e5e21da4. I just wanted to confirm that you added the
> >systemlyxdir one manually and just forgot to
Am 01.04.2016 um 22:33 schrieb Georg Baum:
Note that Peter made some further tests and found out that the merged build
does not fix the crash, but only hides it:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/10009
Yes, and Peter already fixed this this weekend. I used the latest Qt 5.6
build with this patch
attached is a patch to update the layout of acmsiggraph according to the
latest development.lyx file.
Is this OK to go in or what else do I have to do?
thanks and regards
Uwe
p.s. sorry for not following the list. I had/have lot of stress and try
to have a look the next days to be up to date
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 12:55:24AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>
> BTW, the patch does not apply cleanly anymore.
Updated patch attached.
--
Enrico
diff --git a/development/FORMAT b/development/FORMAT
index 9384409..01319df 100644
--- a/development/FORMAT
+++ b/development/FORMAT
@@ -11,6 +
Am 29.03.2016 um 23:49 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
Uwe, this commit introduced two \origin tags. I removed the unavailable
one at e5e21da4. I just wanted to confirm that you added the
systemlyxdir one manually and just forgot to remove the unavailable one.
Yes, sorry, I demonstrated this to Jean-
On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 11:12:01AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
>
> Is there a menu entry for inserting LyX separators and paragraph breaks?
> I would have thought I'd find it under Insert> Formatting.
No, they are only automatically inserted through some menus or when
converting old documents. Th
Am 02.04.2016 um 01:20 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
This location was not intuitive to me either. Perhaps it was chosen
because that way it will not ship with LyX?
Kind of. These are files which no normal user should ever see and we know it is
so obsolete that it deserves deletion, but it might be of
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 05:41:47PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>
> José? Can you review and test this patch before Monday? If you do so,
> please give an explicit +1 if you support the inclusion of it for 2.2.0.
I think that you should take the responsibility of making a decision.
The worst tha
Guenter Milde wrote:
> The patch is ready.
>
> This is the "new layout for new cls file name" case, similar to what we
> already have for, e.g. scrltr2.
>
> As it looks like we all agree that a new layout does *not* require a file
> format update, we could also put this in after rc1.
>
> Scott,
Guenter Milde wrote:
>
> Dear Georg,
>
> thank you for your feedback.
>
> On 2016-04-03, Georg Baum wrote:
>
>> Concerning the list in section 2.2 I'd prefer it to stay simple. It
>> starts to become too complicated for my taste. There is too much
>> nesting, footnotes, and you have to read tw
Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Thanks to the help of several LyX developers who addressed needed issues
> for 2.2.0rc1, we are getting close. I would like to propose Tuesday as
> the tentative date to tag and tar rc1. There are still some issues that
> are pending but I hope that they can
Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Georg,
> I am somewhat confused. Was the ack from arabic translator
> for all these changes already?
Yes, on the users list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-users@lists.lyx.org/msg102705.html
Georg
Am 04.04.2016 um 12:24 schrieb Andrew Parsloe:
On 4/04/2016 10:19 a.m., Andrew Parsloe wrote:
On 4/04/2016 9:02 a.m., Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 07:50:58AM +1200, Andrew Parsloe wrote:
On 4/04/2016 5:38 a.m., Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 10:14:18AM +120
On 4/04/2016 10:19 a.m., Andrew Parsloe wrote:
On 4/04/2016 9:02 a.m., Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 07:50:58AM +1200, Andrew Parsloe wrote:
On 4/04/2016 5:38 a.m., Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 10:14:18AM +1200, Andrew Parsloe wrote:
On 3/04/2016 2:44 a.m.,
On 2016-04-01, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:08:59PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
>> On 03/31/2016 03:45 PM, Georg Baum wrote:
>> > Guenter Milde wrote:
>> >
>> >> For a safe "last minute commit", it would be good if somone could check
>> >> the code itself, and the notes in the
Dear Georg,
thank you for your feedback.
On 2016-04-03, Georg Baum wrote:
> Concerning the list in section 2.2 I'd prefer it to stay simple. It
> starts to become too complicated for my taste. There is too much
> nesting, footnotes, and you have to read two times to understand how
> the line "M
Den 01. april 2016 22:13, skrev Scott Kostyshak:
What I didn't fully grasp until it was explained to
me is that even more important than testing Qt 5.6.0 is testing a binary
built from a new compiler version.
If the compiler version matters: I compiled LyX with gcc 5.3.0 (64-bit), and
libQt5Gu
I noticed something interesting today. I had a Windows laptop where I used the Qt5.5 libraries and git master lyx sources. It compiled fine and the toolbar icons were all fine. Today, I compiled it on a fresh Win8 desktop using Qt5.6 and Lyx git master and all icons disappeared!
But this is mos
25 matches
Mail list logo
