> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> OK, it's in. Many thanks for being such a patient and careful
Juergen> reviewer.
I think I can share the 'patience' part with you.
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> It does not really make more sense than what we have, IMO. I propose
> to leave this code alone (I have no evidence that it is actually
> broken), apply the autoopen patch and revert andre's patch.
OK, it's in. Many thanks for being such a patient and careful reviewer
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: That does not particularly
Juergen> disqualify my approach, no?
>> Did I write that?
Juergen> I just wanted to make clear that I got you right. Seems that
Juergen> misunderstandings scale ver
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Juergen> That does not particularly disqualify my approach, no?
>
> Did I write that?
I just wanted to make clear that I got you right. Seems that misunderstandings
scale very well ;-)
> I meant to say that your patch is OK with me, except
> that I would like this
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> As far as I can see, the only difference is whether insets will
>> close again when one leaves the insets. So the difference is an
>> enhancement.
Juergen> Partly. As said, in case of s&r, we already close, so we have
Juergen>
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Juergen> Without having actually tested your patch,
>
> I see you use the same method as I do :)
;-)
(actually, I didn't know where to test it. Both my trees have been full of
changes lately, and I'd like to keep track).
> Juergen> We had fixed at least a big part o
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Since the auto-open feature is a `big' change, code-wise (should
>> auto-open be a property of the cursor or of the inset?)
Juergen> It's not such a big change. Most of the change is status
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Since the auto-open feature is a `big' change, code-wise (should
> auto-open be a property of the cursor or of the inset?)
It's not such a big change. Most of the change is status_ -> status().
> and UI-wise
> (do I want closed footnotes to pop-up on me when I do c
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
>> I have adapted the patch to current cvs (see attached).
Juergen> After some more testing, I came up with the attached,
Juergen> slightly improved version, which does also respect inlined
Ju
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> I have adapted the patch to current cvs (see attached).
After some more testing, I came up with the attached, slightly improved
version, which does also respect inlined (as well opened) insets (i.e. does
not force inlined ERTs to opened ones when the cursor enters,
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Test it hard, and get ok from J-M as well.
Certainly. Maybe even André finds the time to review the three assert fixes
over the weekend.
Jürgen
Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| While thinking about the last (!) remaining critical bug in the 1.4 pipe, I
| stumbled over an old patch from Alfredo, which was rejected due to the
| feature freeze
| (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=lyx-devel&m=110186623406865&q=p3)
|
| The t
While thinking about the last (!) remaining critical bug in the 1.4 pipe, I
stumbled over an old patch from Alfredo, which was rejected due to the
feature freeze
(http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=lyx-devel&m=110186623406865&q=p3)
The thing is, now, that this patch fixes the assert in a really ele
13 matches
Mail list logo
