Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-14 Thread Angus Leeming
On Wednesday 14 March 2001 11:23, John Levon wrote: > I should still patch the params to have a string bufferName rather than buffer * though ? Yupp > Or did you do that already too :)) Nope

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-14 Thread John Levon
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Angus Leeming wrote: > I think that it'd be fairly easy, but why don't we leave things as they are > because this comes for free in BRANCH_MVC. (Ie, it's already been done). > > A ok I should still patch the params to have a string bufferName rather than buffer * though

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-14 Thread Angus Leeming
On Wednesday 14 March 2001 11:13, John Levon wrote: > On 14 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I > > John> changed insetinclude a bit. > > > > So, angus, ca

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-14 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> Sorry, JMarc, I've just done so. Didn't realise that you'd Angus> adopted it. There was absolutely nothing wrong with his patch, Angus> just large doses of stupidity in my brain. I've done nothing yet, so I appreciate that you did

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-14 Thread John Levon
On 14 Mar 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I > John> changed insetinclude a bit. > > So, angus, can I deduce from your later message that I can actually > apply the p

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-14 Thread Angus Leeming
On Wednesday 14 March 2001 11:04, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I > John> changed insetinclude a bit. > > So, angus, can I deduce from your later message that I can actua

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-14 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I John> changed insetinclude a bit. So, angus, can I deduce from your later message that I can actually apply the patch? JMarc

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread Angus Leeming
Public apology. It appears I can't read!!! A On Tuesday 13 March 2001 16:35, John Levon wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Angus Leeming wrote: > > > On Tuesday 13 March 2001 16:01, John Levon wrote: > > > Can I just point out I didn't *add* this, I simply moved it - it was already > > > a mem

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread John Levon
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Angus Leeming wrote: > On Tuesday 13 March 2001 16:01, John Levon wrote: > > Can I just point out I didn't *add* this, I simply moved it - it was already > > a member of insetinclude.C > > I know. But you're only doing this so that you can pass/store an InsetCommand > to Fo

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread Angus Leeming
On Tuesday 13 March 2001 16:01, John Levon wrote: > Can I just point out I didn't *add* this, I simply moved it - it was already > a member of insetinclude.C I know. But you're only doing this so that you can pass/store an InsetCommand to FormInclude. I don't think that we should rush getting x

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread John Levon
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, John Levon wrote: > forgot to mention, the only thing the frontend wants it for is to get the associated buffer filename john -- "Open Source: Divided we stand, united we fall."

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread John Levon
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Angus Leeming wrote: > On Tuesday 13 March 2001 13:27, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I > > John> changed insetinclude a bit. > > > > It is fin

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread Angus Leeming
On Tuesday 13 March 2001 13:27, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I > John> changed insetinclude a bit. > > It is fine with me and I could apply it, but I'd like first to hea

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread Angus Leeming
On Tuesday 13 March 2001 13:27, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I > John> changed insetinclude a bit. > > It is fine with me and I could apply it, but I'd like first to hea

Re: [PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-13 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I John> changed insetinclude a bit. It is fine with me and I could apply it, but I'd like first to hear from Angus wrt the changes in Params and also where and how the buffer

[PATCH] re-worked FormInclude

2001-03-12 Thread John Levon
Attached is a fixed FormInclude. It's quite a large patch as I changed insetinclude a bit. There are still some "issues" with the button controller but they will get worked out like the others thanks john -- "This is mindless pedantism up with which I will not put." - Donald Knuth on