Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Once again my patch does not break the compilation of existing
> documents!!! It adds styles necessary to fulfill the submission
> guidelines for ACM papers and conferences.
If a document produced with LyX 2.0.6 does not compile or produces wrong
result on LyX 2.0.5, the fil
Am 16.12.2012 18:27, schrieb Richard Heck:
I understand your point. But as said, who really downgrades from a
working LyX 2.0.6 to 2.0.5?
I think this question has been answered. The worry isn't so much that
people downgrade (though they do, if a new version introduces a bug that
really bother
On 12/13/2012 06:32 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Am 10.12.2012 18:59, schrieb Richard Heck:
So what does my change break?
Here's my problem: If we do things as you propose, then we have
different layout files with the same
name under 2.0.5 and 2.0.6.
I understand your point. But as said, who really
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> I was very upset because I currently invest a huge portion of my spare
> time for LyX and I think that everybody should get the time to argue. I
> currently cannot write posts every day. Moreover, before we change
> something fundamental like our layout update policy, we should
Am 10.12.2012 18:59, schrieb Richard Heck:
Sorry, but why do you decide before I could comment? Please read my comments
from today.
I judged that further discussion was not going to change people's minds, as
indeed it did not.
I was very upset because I currently invest a huge portion of m
Georg Baum wrote:
> > Is it a consensus if one developer is not fine with that? What about the
> > users? Have you ever thought about them and/or asked them? (Se my first
> > mail from today.) If you want to kick me out of the development please
> > tell me but this is not fair!
>
> Nobody wants t
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Is it a consensus if one developer is not fine with that? What about the
> users? Have you ever thought about them and/or asked them? (Se my first
> mail from today.) If you want to kick me out of the development please
> tell me but this is not fair!
Nobody wants that. I very
On 12/09/2012 08:21 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Am 07.12.2012 17:00, schrieb Richard Heck:
After all of this discussion,
Sorry, but why do you decide before I could comment? Please read my
comments from today.
I judged that further discussion was not going to change people's minds,
as indeed it
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> If my changes for the ACM journals cannot go in to LyX 2.0.6,
> I will stop to support any existing journal layout and also not write new
> ones because it then makes no sense that LyX provides any journal layout.
Nobody said this. You just have to provide a new layout.
Jürge
Am 07.12.2012 17:00, schrieb Richard Heck:
After all of this discussion,
Sorry, but why do you decide before I could comment? Please read my comments
from today.
it seems to me that the consensus is that we should not make major
changes to layout files for minor releases.
Is it a consensu
After all of this discussion, it seems to me that the consensus is that
we should not make major changes to layout files for minor releases. I
understand Uwe's reasons for wanting to do so, but it will break a lot
of documents for people whose machines do not automatically update when
new cla
11 matches
Mail list logo
