Le 17/04/2022 à 00:22, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
Also, one should decide whether master or child status matters.
Right, I prefer child, as once this lfun is bound, it will be triggered on the
edited inset - i.e. typically child.
OTOH, using producesOutput() as test looks fine to me logically and
On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 04:12:38PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>It turned out to be even easier, because no one removed the old code
> >>when this feature was killed, it's just called assign.
> >>
> >>Patch attached. I'll strip context menu entry before commiting unless
> >>someone does n
Le 16/04/2022 à 15:30, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
Le 15/04/2022 à 17:21, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
It turned out to be even easier, because no one removed the old code
when this feature was killed, it's just called assign.
Patch attached. I'll strip context menu entry before commiting unless
so
Le 15/04/2022 à 17:21, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
It turned out to be even easier, because no one removed the old code
when this feature was killed, it's just called assign.
Patch attached. I'll strip context menu entry before commiting unless
someone does not actively ask for it.
Looks good, excep
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 05:21:46PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 02:41:53AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 12:01:04AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > > Le 13/04/2022 ?? 14:39, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> > > >So changing the core of the patch to somet
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 02:41:53AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 12:01:04AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Le 13/04/2022 ?? 14:39, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> > >So changing the core of the patch to something like
> > >
> > >+ case LFUN_BRANCH_SYNC_ALL:
> > >+ lyx:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 02:41:53AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 12:01:04AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Le 13/04/2022 ?? 14:39, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> > >So changing the core of the patch to something like
> > >
> > >+ case LFUN_BRANCH_SYNC_ALL:
> > >+ lyx:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 12:01:04AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 13/04/2022 ?? 14:39, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> >So changing the core of the patch to something like
> >
> >+ case LFUN_BRANCH_SYNC_ALL:
> >+ lyx::dispatch(FuncRequest(LFUN_INSET_FORALL, "Branch:" +
> >params_.branch +
Le 13/04/2022 à 14:39, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
So changing the core of the patch to something like
+ case LFUN_BRANCH_SYNC_ALL:
+ lyx::dispatch(FuncRequest(LFUN_INSET_FORALL, "Branch:" + params_.branch +
" inset-toggle auto"));
+ break;
would be acceptable for you?
Sure, once t
On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 12:04:00PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 13/04/2022 ?? 11:48, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> >On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:17:44PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>Le 11/04/2022 ?? 13:44, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> >>>So what is your reading of the results?
> >>>Seems to
Le 13/04/2022 à 11:48, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:17:44PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 11/04/2022 ?? 13:44, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
So what is your reading of the results?
Seems to me no interest. As a result I would favor committing my patch
minus context menu UI p
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 02:17:44PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 11/04/2022 ?? 13:44, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> >So what is your reading of the results?
> >Seems to me no interest. As a result I would favor committing my patch
> >minus context menu UI plus any changes you might have for the
Le 11/04/2022 à 13:44, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
So what is your reading of the results?
Seems to me no interest. As a result I would favor committing my patch
minus context menu UI plus any changes you might have for the wording.
And I'll add some note into manuals.
I did read your patch, but I do
On Sat, Apr 02, 2022 at 10:38:13AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 11:15:53PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:53:38AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > If you agree with this proposal, I can ask on lyx-users. If
> > > you disagree, let's continue d
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 11:15:53PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:53:38AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > If you agree with this proposal, I can ask on lyx-users. If
> > you disagree, let's continue discussion and hopefully someone else has
> > an opinion.
>
> I am comple
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:53:38AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> If you agree with this proposal, I can ask on lyx-users. If
> you disagree, let's continue discussion and hopefully someone else has
> an opinion.
I am completely fine with your proposal, please ask on user list.
If no one is inter
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 09:26:32PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 02:30:26PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > > and/or in the context menu when right-clicking on a branch?
> > >
> > > The attached patch solves the problem for me.
> > > I would like to get at least the lfun
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 02:30:26PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > and/or in the context menu when right-clicking on a branch?
> >
> > The attached patch solves the problem for me.
> > I would like to get at least the lfun to the master (I can add note about
> > this
> > lfun for binding to
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 07:28:37PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 07:54:31AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 01:33:32PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 07:52:33PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > > > Is this intended? How do
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 07:54:31AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 01:33:32PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 07:52:33PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > > Is this intended? How do I open all activated branch insets now?
> > >
> > > I don't know if
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 01:33:32PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 07:52:33PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > Is this intended? How do I open all activated branch insets now?
> >
> > I don't know if we have that functionality. Not sure it helps, but to
> > open all branch i
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 07:52:33PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > Is this intended? How do I open all activated branch insets now?
>
> I don't know if we have that functionality. Not sure it helps, but to
> open all branch insets of "my-branch-name":
>
> inset-forall Branch:my-branch-name in
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 02:22:22PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Hi,
> in my memory when some branch was activated in document settings all its
> insets got opened, which was handy.
> But it does not seem to function that way anymore.
I'm the one to blame: 742b39f4.
See also discussion here:
h
Hi,
in my memory when some branch was activated in document settings all its insets
got opened, which was handy.
But it does not seem to function that way anymore.
Is this intended? How do I open all activated branch insets now?
Pavel
--
lyx-devel mailing list
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
http://list
24 matches
Mail list logo
