Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote:
> For interested people, I have sent the diff two weeks ago. I can clean
> my working code and resend the patch.
Unfortunately, I'm very busy in RL currently, but I'll try to help you with
polishing, as promised.
Jürgen
Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote:
> As José indicated, I need support two (or more) other developers to
> add multiple index functionality for lyx 1.5. The development on my
> side is finished, what is necessary is to review the code add lyx2lyx
> stuff, and... a bit love of course.. :)
>
> For interested
As José indicated, I need support two (or more) other developers to
add multiple index functionality for lyx 1.5. The development on my
side is finished, what is necessary is to review the code add lyx2lyx
stuff, and... a bit love of course.. :)
For interested people, I have sent the diff two wee
OK, what I meant is: if there will be more changes, it might be tricky for you
to maintain your tree (because there might be conflicting changes).
> we are thinking in parallel then.. My only concern is for index.sty
> there are four obligatory and one optional parameter. it will be hell
> of a
On Saturday 07 October 2006 09:47, Georg Baum wrote:
> Am Freitag, 6. Oktober 2006 18:51 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes:
> > > "Michael" == Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Michael> BTW: Do we have an agenda that says what we want to achieve
> > Michael> for 1.5 and what has to wa
Am Freitag, 6. Oktober 2006 18:51 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes:
> > "Michael" == Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Michael> BTW: Do we have an agenda that says what we want to achieve
> Michael> for 1.5 and what has to wait for 1.6+?
>
> I guess that as soon as unicode works, we wi
> "Michael" == Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Michael> BTW: Do we have an agenda that says what we want to achieve
Michael> for 1.5 and what has to wait for 1.6+?
I guess that as soon as unicode works, we will declare that no more
new features are allowed (but maybe Dr. José has ano
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote:
Is there anyone working on multiple indices? If no, I'd like to start
working on it..
This is one thing that is one my agenda for a long time, but since I don't
find the time to do it, I'd be glad if you'd vo
Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote:
> Maybe.. but, you know, in some day users will complain as, where is my
> twentieth index etc. The problem here is to keep track of number of
> writes, some of which are not index related files, not to exceed
> number 16. My programming habits tell me I should control it f
On 10/6/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Ozgur" == Ozgur Ugras BARAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What is wrong with multind.sty?
>>
Ozgur> nothing.. It just seems to me it is no fancier than index.sty..
Ozgur> it also requires multiple makeindex runs, so I didn't see
On 10/6/06, Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think you misunderstood Jürgen. I believe he agrees with you.
oh, sorry :/
> I have already sent the inetcommandparams changes. There is no change
> for insetcommand from me.. Georg will improve it a little and submit
> to svn, i guess.. Th
> "Ozgur" == Ozgur Ugras BARAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What is wrong with multind.sty?
>>
Ozgur> nothing.. It just seems to me it is no fancier than index.sty..
Ozgur> it also requires multiple makeindex runs, so I didn't see any
Ozgur> advantage over index.sty. We can still support it
Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote:
> On 10/6/06, Juergen Spitzmueller
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote:
>> > I plan to support splitidx, since it runs once on the file. So, it is
>> > easier to handle. For example, I will not have to control the number
>> > of indices, since the file
e it a little and submit
to svn, i guess.. This is necessary also for my nomencl
implementation..
> But I
> have to ask a couple of things..
>
> - I assume you have some idea on how to implement this feature, in
> terms of user interface etc. If you share your vision about multiple
&g
a couple of things..
>
> - I assume you have some idea on how to implement this feature, in
> terms of user interface etc. If you share your vision about multiple
> indices, then both of us will be happy with the result.
OK. My idea was to add an "index" pane to the documents dia
On 10/6/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>> "Ozgur" == Ozgur Ugras BARAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What do you have in mind?
Ozgur> well... multiple indices.. :)
Like in ${x_i}_j$, for example? ;)
Ozgur> I plan to sup
>>>>> "Ozgur" == Ozgur Ugras BARAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What do you have in mind?
Ozgur> well... multiple indices.. :)
Like in ${x_i}_j$, for example? ;)
Ozgur> I plan to support splitidx, since it runs once on the file. So,
Ozgur> it is
What do you have in mind?
well... multiple indices.. :)
JMarc
I plan to support splitidx, since it runs once on the file. So, it is
easier to handle. For example, I will not have to control the number
of indices, since the file write handle of Latex is limited.
However, splitidx is not
Ozgur Ugras BARAN wrote:
> Is there anyone working on multiple indices? If no, I'd like to start
> working on it..
This is one thing that is one my agenda for a long time, but since I don't
find the time to do it, I'd be glad if you'd volunteer, the more so as you
>>>>> "Ozgur" == Ozgur Ugras BARAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ozgur> Is there anyone working on multiple indices? If no, I'd like to
Ozgur> start working on it..
What do you have in mind?
JMarc
Is there anyone working on multiple indices? If no, I'd like to start
working on it..
ugras
21 matches
Mail list logo
