Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 05:07:33PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
>
| ...
>
>> > | So, concludingly, I am pretty sure some of this (at least the enum
>> > | stuff, and appendix number labels, which my patch doesn't even address
>> > | yet) worked right ar
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 03:12:03PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>>
>> My main reaons for being so unwilling is the changes to the .layout
>> format. It really looks like a cludge to me. (even the existing one)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lgb
>
| OK, he
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 05:07:33PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
...
> > | So, concludingly, I am pretty sure some of this (at least the enum
> > | stuff, and appendix number labels, which my patch doesn't even address
> > | yet) worked right around version 1.2. I could prepare a patch only fixing
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 03:12:03PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
> My main reaons for being so unwilling is the changes to the .layout
> format. It really looks like a cludge to me. (even the existing one)
>
>
> --
> Lgb
OK, here is one more, the fix for 1975 (cursor positioning in
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 03:12:03PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:46:55PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> >> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> | ...
> >
> >> >> If at all possible I'd like to avoid
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:46:55PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| ...
>
>> >> If at all possible I'd like to avoid all layout changes now.
>> >> what are the implications?
>> >
>> | 1) LtR should rema
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:46:55PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
> >> If at all possible I'd like to avoid all layout changes now.
> >> what are the implications?
> >
> | 1) LtR should remain unaffected. Business as usual.
> | 2) It will be pos
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 12:09, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> | On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 11:23:11AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> >> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> >> Also,
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 12:09, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 11:23:11AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> >> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> >> Also, you can verify by code inspection or testing (I did bo
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 11:23:11AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> >> Also, you can verify by code inspection or testing (I did both) that all
>> >> proposed patches are neutral for ordinary LtR tex
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 11:23:11AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Also, you can verify by code inspection or testing (I did both) that all
> >> proposed patches are neutral for ordinary LtR text, so we won't lose
> >> anything by just putting
On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 12:23, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Also, you can verify by code inspection or testing (I did both) that all
> >> proposed patches are neutral for ordinary LtR text, so we won't lose
> >> anything by just putting it in. I woul
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Also, you can verify by code inspection or testing (I did both) that all
>> proposed patches are neutral for ordinary LtR text, so we won't lose
>> anything by just putting it in. I would very much appreciate a second
>> opinion though.
>>
>> - Martin
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 10:13, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Bug 1965: Cursor movement at RtL paragraph end broken
> Bug 1970: Selecting an area within one row broken in RtL
>
> Both are fixed by the attached patch, bug 1970 trivially.
>
> I added these to Bugzilla, and also
>
> Bug 1969: Sectioning and
14 matches
Mail list logo
