On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
If for every conceptual change we need everyone to understand the
direction, I wish you good luck.
This should at least be satisfied:
one person < n:o people who understad < everyone
Perhaps even:
2-3 persons < n:o peopl
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I meant cleanup as "redesign". There is a look of things that are
>> simply not designed design in LyX.
>
> And you are sure that your ideas on design cannot benefit from outside
> input. If wish I were you.
Ideas an
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I meant cleanup as "redesign". There is a look of things that are
> simply not designed design in LyX.
And you are sure that your ideas on design cannot benefit from outside
input. If wish I were you.
> If for every conceptual change we need everyo
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The 1.5 development process was an order of magnitude faster and the
resulting code is much *cleaner* than the 1.4 one. I reckon that this
is because of the increased liberty. I am _not_ going to send patches
for each and
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The 1.5 development process was an order of magnitude faster and the
> resulting code is much *cleaner* than the 1.4 one. I reckon that this
> is because of the increased liberty. I am _not_ going to send patches
> for each and every cleanup I'll may
> > While I agree that 1.5.0 is far better than 1.4.x, it was mostly
> > unusable during development,
>
> That's not really true. It is mostly unstable during the unicode
> transition, that's all.
At least I know that mouse-hovering introduced numerous bugs that were
cleared at a very late stage.
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, as I said, the incremental svn diff are already available.
> Reviewing such a big patch is masochistic.
Sometimes less than accepting it blindly :)
JMarc
JMarc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
No, as I said, the incremental svn diff are already available.
Reviewing such a big patch is masochistic.
Being ignorant, could you please tell me how you mean I shold access the
incremental diff? (Or point me to suitabl
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
No, as I said, the incremental svn diff are already available. Reviewing
such a big patch is masochistic.
Being ignorant, could you please tell me how you mean I shold access the
incremental diff? (Or point me to suitable instructions of course).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
How about copying stuff from those and pasting it as introductory
comments in a suitable source file?
An even lazier approach would be to let those interested to just look
at the code ;-).
Lazier for you, but more wo
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
How about copying stuff from those and pasting it as introductory
comments in a suitable source file?
An even lazier approach would be to let those interested to just look at the
code ;-).
Lazier for you, but more work for many others;-) In a
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
(out of order):
I apologize for the long and disoriented email. I just followed my thoughts.
Nice post.
Every patch has the potential to introduce new bugs, no matter how
simple it looks, and others' opinion can obviously help. Taking the
recent File->Rev
Bo Peng wrote:
I am quite busy recently and have not been actively testing a few
patches that I should have looked at (middle button paste, latex_lang,
no spell checking etc). But I felt that I have to take a side in this
debate this time. Maybe surprisingly, I am at Lar's side.
I am not sure ho
"Bo Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW, I am not at Bromarv and I have not attended any development
> meeting, but I think the meeting should not be a place where people
> gather around and write code, which can be done anywhere.
No, because writing code with someone else is something diffe
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
> the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup the current mess
> (full of xxx_CODE). Please have a look, I'd like to commit it "soon".
> I am sure it has some small b
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Man, I am not going to double my work just for the pleasure of having
> a "clean" trunk svn history.
If you just land this branch, I can tell you that it will get
immediately reverted.
> I didn't. My mind was pretty clear on what I was going to do
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For fuck sake, the commit logs are there to look at! Sorry Christian,
> it's not against you but I've already gone through the lengthy process
> of proving myself to Lars and others. I am simply not going to do it
> again.
Why do you think I am posti
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You misunderstood my tone. I am simply saying that it's fine if not
> everybody knows and understand everything.
OK. But I think Lars is interested in actually understanding what this
does.
Aren't there parts that are kind of not related and could g
I am quite busy recently and have not been actively testing a few
patches that I should have looked at (middle button paste, latex_lang,
no spell checking etc). But I felt that I have to take a side in this
debate this time. Maybe surprisingly, I am at Lar's side.
I am not sure how many active dev
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I think I've done that already. If nobody listen (I am not talking
about you) then I am not going to explain it again.
Let me repeat it again:
one Buffer -> one BufferView -> one WorkArea.
one LyXView will create WorkArea
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I think I've done that already. If nobody listen (I am not talking about you)
then I am not going to explain it again.
Let me repeat it again:
one Buffer -> one BufferView -> one WorkArea.
one LyXView will create WorkAreas on demand.
As simple as
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Let me repeat it again:
> one Buffer -> one BufferView -> one WorkArea.
> one LyXView will create WorkAreas on demand.
With this degree of generality, this is perfect.
> As simple as that.
Now could you do it with more granularity ;-)
A/
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > | > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | >
| > | >> Then look at the diff? If you are not a
Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
For fuck sake, the commit logs are there to look at! Sorry Christian,
it's not against you but I've already gone through the lengthy process
of proving myself to Lars and others. I am simply not going to do it
again.
It's not about proving yo
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > | > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | >
| > | >> Then look at the diff? If you are not able to understand the log and
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| >> Then look at the diff? If you are not able to understand the log and
| >> the diff then it is because you don't know this stuff.
| > C
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> For fuck sake, the commit logs are there to look at! Sorry Christian,
> it's not against you but I've already gone through the lengthy process
> of proving myself to Lars and others. I am simply not going to do it
> again.
It's not about proving yourself, it is about ma
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| >> Then look at the diff? If you are not able to understand the log and
| >> the diff then it is because you don't know this stuff.
| > Calm down please. I do not thi
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Then look at the diff? If you are not able to understand the log and
the diff then it is because you don't know this stuff.
Calm down please. I do not think we are going to go very far in this
direction.
You misunder
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
For fuck sake, the commit logs are there to look at! Sorry Christian,
it's not against you but I've already gone through the lengthy process
of proving myself to Lars and others. I am simply not going to do it
again.
Don't worry, I don't take it
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then look at the diff? If you are not able to understand the log and
> the diff then it is because you don't know this stuff.
Calm down please. I do not think we are going to go very far in this
direction.
JMarc
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
It is about having all developers on the same page, understanding the
changes done in the lyx source and agreeing that this is the best
approach.
I've already explained why this is the right approach. I am fad up of
this discussion.
A large un-split, patch are ha
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| > On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| >
| >> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >>
| >>> Lars, as always, I simply cannot understand you and vice-versa. So
| >>> please, work as you like and let
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars, as always, I simply cannot understand you and vice-versa. So
please, work as you like and let me work as I like. I won't listen to
you in any case...
Hello there,
I
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars, as always, I simply cannot understand you and vice-versa. So
please, work as you like and let me work as I like. I won't listen to
you in any case...
Hello there,
I am always impressed to se
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars, as always, I simply cannot understand you and vice-versa. So
please, work as you like and let me work as I like. I won't listen to
you in any case...
Hello there,
I am always impressed to see how you manage to sp
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lars, as always, I simply cannot understand you and vice-versa. So
> please, work as you like and let me work as I like. I won't listen to
> you in any case...
Hello there,
I am always impressed to see how you manage to speak past each other
:) But
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > This is _not_ the way to work with branches. You as the branch owner
| > must do the work of splitting up your (now quite huge I guess) patch,
| > show it to others, make it palatable for them and do the commit.
|
| I'v
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > | > Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
| > | > the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
| > the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup the current mess
| > (full of xxx_CODE). Please have a look,
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
| > the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup the current mess
| > (full of xxx_CODE). Please have a look, I'd like to commit it "soon"
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup the current mess
(full of xxx_CODE). Please have a look, I'd like to commit it "soon".
I am sure it has some small bugs, but I am confident they
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup the current mess
(full of xxx_CODE). Please have a look, I'd like to commit it "soon".
I am sure it has some small bugs, but I am confident they
Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup the current mess
(full of xxx_CODE). Please have a look, I'd like to commit it "soon".
I am sure it has some small bugs, but I am confident they can be
worked around. OTOH,
44 matches
Mail list logo
