On Monday 01 May 2006 13:09, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 11:35:32PM +0100, Jose' Matos wrote:
> > PS: FWIW, Susana completed with success her PhD. :-)
>
> So you've finally got one in the family. Or did I miss anything?
I hope to do the same next September/October. :-)
So
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 11:35:32PM +0100, Jose' Matos wrote:
> PS: FWIW, Susana completed with success her PhD. :-)
So you've finally got one in the family. Or did I miss anything?
Andre'
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 06:42:28PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> Am Freitag, 28. April 2006 17:35 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 04:52:02PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> > > - send patches against 1.4 (step by step, one fix = one patch)
> >
> > I was asked to send patches for tr
Am Samstag, 29. April 2006 15:27 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> Right. But you are not frustrated by someone who says that you are
> also wasting his time, instead you get gratitude and, in turn, this
> is rewarding for you.
Who said you were waisting his time? I never did that. I said that I have
Am Freitag, 28. April 2006 17:35 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 04:52:02PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> > - send patches against 1.4 (step by step, one fix = one patch)
>
> I was asked to send patches for trunk. Please, make your mind.
That is true. First comes trunk, then 1.4
Am Freitag, 28. April 2006 17:12 schrieb Angus Leeming:
> I used to lurve fights on Fridays. Please be ruder!
And then you write 'please'? That won't work :-) (no friday anymore). BTW
what is lurve? I only know lure.
Georg
Am Freitag, 28. April 2006 17:07 schrieb Bo Peng:
> I am still wondering why people do not like my local-layout-cls
> patch(es). Forcing users to put .layout and .cls in their respective
> places, using that lengthy and troublesome procedure, is *not* nice.
> Even latex allows local .cls file!
II
On Saturday 29 April 2006 16:25, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>
> You mean nobody explained you? I understand your reaction then. I've
> read a bit the archive and here is my interpretation: In the old old
> days when men were men and lyx was a pioneer project, there were huge
> flame wars among develo
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 05:25:44PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:36:31PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >
> >> It was friday Enrico, Friday!
> >
> > Please, explain this Friday thing. In my culture Friday is like
> > Saturday, or
Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:36:31PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
It was friday Enrico, Friday!
Please, explain this Friday thing. In my culture Friday is like
Saturday, or Monday, or... (sorry for being so stupid).
You mean nobody explained you? I understand yo
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:36:31PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> It was friday Enrico, Friday!
Please, explain this Friday thing. In my culture Friday is like
Saturday, or Monday, or... (sorry for being so stupid).
--
Enrico
Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 03:21:13PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 02:34:43PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Michael Gerz a écrit :
Gentlemen,
I think I have to give some comments on the heated 1.4 vs. 1.5 dis
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 03:21:13PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 02:34:43PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Gerz a écrit :
> >>> Gentlemen,
> >>>
> >>> I think I have to give some comments on the heated 1.4 vs. 1.5 discu
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 10:42:34AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Enrico" == Enrico Forestieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Enrico> It's a benefit/cost ratio, Jean-Marc. I gain nothing in having
> Enrico> my patches applied. I can simply patch my version and have a
> Enrico> very
Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 02:34:43PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Michael Gerz a écrit :
Gentlemen,
I think I have to give some comments on the heated 1.4 vs. 1.5 discussion.
I've hoped that it would be more heated... like it should be for a
decent friday flame w
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 02:34:43PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Michael Gerz a écrit :
> > Gentlemen,
> >
> > I think I have to give some comments on the heated 1.4 vs. 1.5 discussion.
>
> I've hoped that it would be more heated... like it should be for a
> decent friday flame war but I di
Michael Gerz a écrit :
Gentlemen,
I think I have to give some comments on the heated 1.4 vs. 1.5 discussion.
I've hoped that it would be more heated... like it should be for a
decent friday flame war but I did not succeed. Except for Enrico and
Georg who managed to write one or two bad words
> "Enrico" == Enrico Forestieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Enrico> It's a benefit/cost ratio, Jean-Marc. I gain nothing in having
Enrico> my patches applied. I can simply patch my version and have a
Enrico> very high value for that ratio. This may seem selfish
Enrico> behaviour but gives me m
Gentlemen,
I think I have to give some comments on the heated 1.4 vs. 1.5 discussion.
I understand that everybody wants to have his favourite feature
available as soon as possible. However, we are obliged to provide the
LyX users with a series of stable versions at the same time. If someone
w
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I used to lurve fights on Fridays. Please be ruder!
> I am trying to revive the tradition but nobody follows... Do you think I
> should be even ruder?
Yeah. Tell 'em like it is!
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 03:12:57PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> So it is broken and will stay broken? It is not that important, after
> >> all this simply avoids an empty "TeX Information", but I am really
> >> annoyed that seemingly everything which is
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 06:38:04PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 05:48:24PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >
> >>Please ask for that damn svn access!
> >
> >Abdel,
> >
> >I am not a programmer but a "power user" (using Windows parliance)
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 05:54:35PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Enrico" == Enrico Forestieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Enrico> Here is the problem. Nobody cares about cygwin, ergo it is not
> Enrico> well accepted. I mean, you have to do something for nothing, I
> Enrico> woul
Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 05:48:24PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Please ask for that damn svn access!
Abdel,
I am not a programmer but a "power user" (using Windows parliance),
and my contribution to LyX would be poor.
bla bla bla...
The native Windows port
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 05:48:24PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Please ask for that damn svn access!
Abdel,
I am not a programmer but a "power user" (using Windows parliance),
and my contribution to LyX would be poor.
The native Windows port had screwed up the cygwin target and nobody
care
Angus Leeming a écrit :
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
So it is broken and will stay broken? It is not that important, after
all this simply avoids an empty "TeX Information", but I am really
annoyed that seemingly everything which is cygwin related is not
well accepted.
Bullshit. In
> "Bo" == Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I agree that getting some of the changes in was painful, but I
>> think the quality of the patches improved.
Bo> I agree with both, taking the recent example of
Bo> Document->compressed. If I can get feedbacks at the current speed,
Bo> I have n
I agree that getting some of the changes in was painful, but I think
the quality of the patches improved.
I agree with both, taking the recent example of Document->compressed.
If I can get feedbacks at the current speed, I have no complain. That
does not have to mean I will invest time on backpo
> "Enrico" == Enrico Forestieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Enrico> Here is the problem. Nobody cares about cygwin, ergo it is not
Enrico> well accepted. I mean, you have to do something for nothing, I
Enrico> would not well accept it, too.
It is not that we do not _care_. It is just that, si
Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 04:52:02PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
- explain why it is needed
- explain how well it is tested
- explain potential risks (or the lack thereof)
- ask for inclusion
I think I always did so.
- commit it (yourself) if OK
Cannot do it.
Enric
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 04:52:02PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>
> > So it is broken and will stay broken? It is not that important, after
> > all this simply avoids an empty "TeX Information", but I am really
> > annoyed that seemingly everything which is cygwin related is
Bo Peng a écrit :
I am sure that you will get more positive feedback if you follow this
procedure.
I really was interested in pushing some of my patches in, because I
think they are important, if not essential, and other people can
benefit from them. However, I feel less and less motivated in d
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> So it is broken and will stay broken? It is not that important, after
>> all this simply avoids an empty "TeX Information", but I am really
>> annoyed that seemingly everything which is cygwin related is not
>> well accepted.
> Bullshit. In my case I don't
I am sure that you will get more positive feedback if you follow this
procedure.
I really was interested in pushing some of my patches in, because I
think they are important, if not essential, and other people can
benefit from them. However, I feel less and less motivated in doing
so. I am using
> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Georg> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Also, (now that I tried it in 1.5) wouldn't it be more readable by
>> trying to put the arrows on the left and bottom border of the
>> inset?
Georg> I did not increase the area covered by the phantom ins
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Also, (now that I tried it in 1.5) wouldn't it be more readable by
> trying to put the arrows on the left and bottom border of the inset?
I did not increase the area covered by the phantom inset in comparison to
the contents on purpose, otherwise you would not get co
Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> So it is broken and will stay broken? It is not that important, after
> all this simply avoids an empty "TeX Information", but I am really
> annoyed that seemingly everything which is cygwin related is not
> well accepted.
Bullshit. In my case I don't have the energy no
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 02:53:08PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> r13704 - EF - Account for Cygwin teTeX on Windows
>
> I'd say no.
So it is broken and will stay broken? It is not that important, after
all this simply avoids an empty "TeX Information", but I am really
annoyed that seemin
> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Georg> That one is really easy indeed (only two new files and a couple
Georg> of changed lines), and the most important thing is that it is
Georg> self contained (if there should be a bug only phantom stuff
Georg> will be affected). I'll prep
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "Michael" == Michael Gerz
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> r13700 - GB - Make MathBigInset working
>
> I'd say no.
I agree, because it is a) not finished yet and b) involves changes at
central places that may have side effects.
> There is also a phant
> "Michael" == Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Michael> Hi Jean-Marc, here comes an updated list of potential 1.4.X
Michael> patches.
Michael> I guess that not all of them make sense for 1.4.X. Guys,
Michael> please let me know if some revision can be removed from the
Michael> list.
Michael Gerz wrote:
> Hi Jean-Marc,
>
> here comes an updated list of potential 1.4.X patches.
Yes, mine (JS) should go in in any case (IMHO).
Jürgen
Hi Jean-Marc,
here comes an updated list of potential 1.4.X patches.
I guess that not all of them make sense for 1.4.X. Guys, please let me
know if some revision can be removed from the list.
Michael
Changes that went into trunk but not into 1.4.X:
---
43 matches
Mail list logo
