Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-04 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 06:37:20PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: >> > We could certainly have a HACKING, but why would we bother the >> user > with a load of stuff they don't care about ? >> >> Your HACKING and my status are the same thin

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread John Levon
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 06:37:20PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > > We could certainly have a HACKING, but why would we bother the user > > with a load of stuff they don't care about ? > > Your HACKING and my status are the same thing. What is the point of the status > file in _your_ mind. stat

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread Angus Leeming
On Thursday 03 April 2003 5:29 pm, John Levon wrote: > On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 06:17:36PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > > I disagree. I think that it is a valuable exercise and not too onerous. > > Exercise ? :) > > We could certainly have a HACKING, but why would we bother the user > with a load

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread John Levon
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 06:17:36PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > I disagree. I think that it is a valuable exercise and not too onerous. Exercise ? :) We could certainly have a HACKING, but why would we bother the user with a load of stuff they don't care about ? > entries. Once the smoke has

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread Angus Leeming
John Levon wrote: > On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:02:42AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > >> Internal Changes > > No point in documenting internal changes IMO I disagree. I think that it is a valuable exercise and not too onerous. Generally, one entry in status will be equivalent to many ChangeLog

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread John Levon
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:02:42AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > Internal Changes No point in documenting internal changes IMO regards john

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:07:58AM +0100, John Levon wrote: > OK ? Ok for the math part. Haven't looked at the rest. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread Angus Leeming
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > John> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:49:12AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > John> wrote: >>> I like that. >>> >>> It would be a good idea todocument _now_ the changes we do to >>> lfuns. > > John> I was thinking

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:48:31AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes John> wrote: >> I can confirm my yay, but I'd like to know what the policy is when >> config files are not found. John> We complain to the user then exit That's OK with me.

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-03 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:49:12AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes John> wrote: >> I like that. >> >> It would be a good idea todocument _now_ the changes we do to >> lfuns. John> I was thinking we need a status file for the dev series too

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-02 Thread John Levon
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:49:12AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I like that. > > It would be a good idea todocument _now_ the changes we do to lfuns. I was thinking we need a status file for the dev series too... john

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-02 Thread John Levon
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:48:31AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I can confirm my yay, but I'd like to know what the policy is when > config files are not found. We complain to the user then exit john

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-02 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> rename as function not binding. Remove the weird behaviour in John> normal text. I like that. It would be a good idea todocument _now_ the changes we do to lfuns. JMarc

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-02 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> John Levon wrote: >> p.s. still waiting for yay/nay on the defaults stuff Angus> Why? JMarc said that it was a good idea but that you should Angus> ensure that it worked in the case of no toolbar. If you have, Angus> then just comm

Re: [PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-01 Thread Angus Leeming
John Levon wrote: > p.s. still waiting for yay/nay on the defaults stuff Why? JMarc said that it was a good idea but that you should ensure that it worked in the case of no toolbar. If you have, then just commit it. -- Angus

[PATCH] clean up tab lfuns a bit

2003-04-01 Thread John Levon
rename as function not binding. Remove the weird behaviour in normal text. OK ? john p.s. still waiting for yay/nay on the defaults stuff Index: lib/bind/math.bind === RCS file: /usr/local/lyx/cvsroot/lyx-devel/lib/bind/math.bind,