On 04/12/2017 06:10 AM, Guenter Milde wrote:
> On 2017-04-11, Richard Heck wrote:
>> On 04/11/2017 04:20 PM, Guenter Milde wrote:
>>> On 2017-04-11, PhilipPirrip wrote:
On 04/11/2017 11:23 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
My proposal of having "a general sheet where one could send options to
On 2017-04-11, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 04/11/2017 04:20 PM, Guenter Milde wrote:
>> On 2017-04-11, PhilipPirrip wrote:
>>> On 04/11/2017 11:23 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
>>> My proposal of having "a general sheet where one could send options to
>>> (the calls of) this and that package would be a go
Am Mittwoch, den 12.04.2017, 00:09 +0200 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> El 11.04.2017 a las 08:30, Jürgen Spitzmüller escribió:
>
> > And I tried to argue that I think these line edits are not a
> > suitable
> > UI.
>
> Hi Jürgen,
>
> now I get your point. Then I retract my patch.
>
> Scott announced yes
El 11.04.2017 a las 08:30, Jürgen Spitzmüller escribió:
And I tried to argue that I think these line edits are not a suitable
UI.
Hi Jürgen,
now I get your point. Then I retract my patch.
Scott announced yesterday a plan for LyX 2.3.0 so it is indeed too late
for LyX 2.3.0 to do something.
On 04/11/2017 04:20 PM, Guenter Milde wrote:
> On 2017-04-11, PhilipPirrip wrote:
>> On 04/11/2017 11:23 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
>> My proposal of having "a general sheet where one could send options to
>> (the calls of) this and that package would be a good way to go - that
>> means, not by just
On 2017-04-11, PhilipPirrip wrote:
> On 04/11/2017 11:23 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> My proposal of having "a general sheet where one could send options to
> (the calls of) this and that package would be a good way to go - that
> means, not by just using \SendOptionsToPackage" will be a freestyle
Am Dienstag, den 11.04.2017, 11:52 -0400 schrieb PhilipPirrip:
> What I understood Juergen said is: one should have clickable buttons
> for
> every possible option, and no other way of passing options to the
> packages.
Where did I state this?
> What I'm saying, agreeing with Uwe, is that having
On 04/11/2017 11:23 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> In fact you agree with Jürgen, IMO. He said it’s not enough to add a
line edit to add the options.
What I understood Juergen said is: one should have clickable buttons for
every possible option, and no other way of passing options to the packages.
Am 11.04.2017 um 16:25 schrieb PhilipPirrip :
>
> On 04/11/2017 02:30 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> And I tried to argue that I think these line edits are not a suitable
>> UI.
>> It is much more different, since the line edit are supposed complex
>> key-value pairs.
>
> Let me disagree with y
On 04/11/2017 02:30 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
And I tried to argue that I think these line edits are not a suitable
UI.
It is much more different, since the line edit are supposed complex
key-value pairs.
Let me disagree with you on this, Juergen. As a long-time user, I too
often missed be
Am Dienstag, den 11.04.2017, 08:30 +0200 schrieb Jürgen Spitzmüller:
> Am Montag, den 10.04.2017, 00:44 +0200 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> > I don't understand. We are talking about 3 simple line edits.
>
> And I tried to argue that I think these line edits are not a suitable
> UI.
>
> > As you can
> >
Am Montag, den 10.04.2017, 01:47 +0200 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> It is like with bug
> http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/8034
> , we wait for years now and I don't see a reason why we don't start
> to
> implement the possibilities to add options to fontspec and also to
> polyglossia now.
Yes, but puttin
Am Montag, den 10.04.2017, 00:44 +0200 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> I don't understand. We are talking about 3 simple line edits.
And I tried to argue that I think these line edits are not a suitable
UI.
> As you can
> see in the patch, this not a massive change in anything. It is just
> to
> provide
El 10.04.2017 a las 00:44, Uwe Stöhr escribió:
And that way I googled around. Googling brings you quickly to the
"Script=Devanagari option. So one doesn't need to be a TeXpert to find
this. One now only needs an input field for that option. When this is
implemented I can update our Wiki pages
El 09.04.2017 a las 10:27, Jürgen Spitzmüller escribió:
In any case, such features need to be implemented at the beginning of
new development cycles, since they need testing and improvement, not at
the end of cycles.
I don't understand. We are talking about 3 simple line edits. As you can
see
Am Freitag, den 07.04.2017, 00:44 +0200 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> Since many years LyX misses the feature to input options to the font
> loading commands \setmainfont etc. We did not act for 5 years
> because
> you said exactly the same as today that it is not the right time:
> http://www.lyx.org/trac
El 06.04.2017 a las 12:01, Jürgen Spitzmüller escribió:
I mean we need to think about a sensible UI instead of cluttering the
dialog with three more line widgets. And I think we should not attempt to
push in one feature after the other at this point, but rather focus on
stabilizing and finishing
2017-04-06 9:31 GMT+02:00 Uwe Stöhr :
>
> *From: *Jürgen Spitzmüller
> *Sent: *Donnerstag, 6. April 2017 08:53
>
> > This looks rather ugly. I think we should integrate this properly for
> 2.4 and not hectically push something into 2.3.
>
> What do you mean? This is what I always wanted to do sin
This looks rather ugly. I think we should integrate this properly for 2.4
and not hectically push something into 2.3.
Jürgen
2017-04-06 3:26 GMT+02:00 Uwe Stöhr :
> El 06.04.2017 a las 03:24, Uwe Stöhr escribió:
>
> Attached is the screenshot of the simple UI.
>>
>
> Now it is attached.
>
> rega
El 06.04.2017 a las 03:24, Uwe Stöhr escribió:
Attached is the screenshot of the simple UI.
Now it is attached.
regards Uwe
21 matches
Mail list logo
