Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Monday 30 September 2002 3:17 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> dns stuff.
>>
>> baywatch had to change its ip address.
| aleem@thorax:devel$ ping baywatch.lyx.org
| PING baywatch.lyx.org (213.203.58.29): 56 data bytes
>
| I take it that this is the
On Monday 30 September 2002 3:17 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> dns stuff.
>
> baywatch had to change its ip address.
aleem@thorax:devel$ ping baywatch.lyx.org
PING baywatch.lyx.org (213.203.58.29): 56 data bytes
I take it that this is the old address and that all will
therefore be fine once t
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Monday 30 September 2002 2:30 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> | I meant to reach a point where we can release something. I'm
>> | being realistics - who is going to look at, for example, the
>> | totally fubared accent code on Qt ? Who knows how to
On Monday 30 September 2002 2:30 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | I meant to reach a point where we can release something. I'm
> | being realistics - who is going to look at, for example, the
> | totally fubared accent code on Qt ? Who knows how to solve
> | the font problems that bother Lars ?
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:51:37PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
>> > Yes, we don't need "full" qt support, but we need "complete" support.
>> > I.e. we cannot have some of the most important parts of the gui not
>> > working at all, but it is ok if the su
John Levon wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 07:18:16PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> > Perhaps having a tabular toolbar for the common tasks, will make it
> > possible to change the tabular dialog without a big decrease in its
> > usability.
> As long as you can still do everything via the dialog, th
On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 07:18:16PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> Perhaps having a tabular toolbar for the common tasks, will make it possible
> to change the tabular dialog without a big decrease in its usability.
As long as you can still do everything via the dialog, then yes.
regards
john
--
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:06:44PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Personally, I think it would be a good idea to start afresh,
> define a TabularParams struct and use the same machinary and
> approach as all the other dialogs.
>
> First though I'd have to win the flame war that this suggestion
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:51:37PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > Yes, we don't need "full" qt support, but we need "complete" support.
> > I.e. we cannot have some of the most important parts of the gui not
> > working at all, but it is ok if the support is not super nice.
>
> Was "Christmas"
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:06:44PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Unfortunately, the Tabular dialog is different to every single
> other dialog in that changes made to it are registered
> immediately. Ie, there's no "Apply" or "Ok" button.
>
> The result is extremely complex code.
Not in Qt.
On Friday 27 September 2002 1:54 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Nah. You get my vote as long as you keep moving...
I've already volunteered to do the Label dialog...
Angus
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:46:14PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> | (a) put 1.3 out without full Qt support
>>
>> Yes, we don't need "full" qt support, but we need "complete" support.
>> I.e. we cannot have some of the most important parts of the
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:06:44PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > * Ed's working on the Document dialog.
> > > * Nobody is working on the Preferences or Tabular dialogs.
> >
> > They both are big _and_ needed, aren't they?
>
> We should start with the Tabular dialog. People can always
> modif
On Friday 27 September 2002 1:28 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 12:28:57PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > * Ed's working on the Document dialog.
> > * Nobody is working on the Preferences or Tabular dialogs.
>
> They both are big _and_ needed, aren't they?
We should start wit
> They both are big _and_ needed, aren't they?
yes
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 12:28:57PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> * Ed's working on the Document dialog.
> * Nobody is working on the Preferences or Tabular dialogs.
They both are big _and_ needed, aren't they?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not ha
> Was "Christmas" for "full" or "complete" support? John?
complete, I would think. Unless people step in to implement the preferences
and tabular dialogs.
On Friday 27 September 2002 12:46 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | I think there was no conclusion.
> |
> | John told us that he probably can't finish before Christmas,
> | nobody was willing/able to help out and Lars said that
> | Christmas is too lat
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:46:14PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | (a) put 1.3 out without full Qt support
>
> Yes, we don't need "full" qt support, but we need "complete" support.
> I.e. we cannot have some of the most important parts of the gui not
> working at all, but it is ok if the su
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I think there was no conclusion.
>
| John told us that he probably can't finish before Christmas, nobody was
| willing/able to help out and Lars said that Christmas is too late.
>
| So how is this to be resolved?
>
| (a) put 1.3 out without full Qt sup
I think there was no conclusion.
John told us that he probably can't finish before Christmas, nobody was
willing/able to help out and Lars said that Christmas is too late.
So how is this to be resolved?
(a) put 1.3 out without full Qt support
(b) revoke feature freeze and try again in November
21 matches
Mail list logo
