On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 08:32:52PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
> I was thinking of adding some options for gzip vs bzip2, etc, and
> definitely for command-line setting of the lyx2lyx script.
Fine with me.
--
Enrico
On 02/06/2011 06:13 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 05:06:46PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
I have done the work on configure.py and committed it.
Thanks, Richard. I am updating it such that to not require external
utilities but only using python modules, as I think it is a
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 05:06:46PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 02/06/2011 09:59 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> >On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:04:19PM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> >
> >>if you are confident about the code and want to support it
> >>the convertor can be added into 2.0.
> >I will cer
On 02/06/2011 09:56 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
So, it is in the tarball
Oh, yes, sorry. I was confused and thought we were talking about what
gets installed.
Anyway, I have moved the script to lib/scripts/ and updated Makefile.am
accordingly. Now lyxpak.py gets installed with the othe
On 02/06/2011 09:59 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:04:19PM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
if you are confident about the code and want to support it
the convertor can be added into 2.0.
I will certainly support it, but I didn't try to push it in the past,
and I am not going
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:04:19PM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> if you are confident about the code and want to support it
> the convertor can be added into 2.0.
I will certainly support it, but I didn't try to push it in the past,
and I am not going to do so now.
--
Enrico
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 09:07:24AM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 02/05/2011 06:51 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> >>>I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using
> >>>lyxpak.py to export may still be a good idea for 2.0.
> >>for sure i have no problem including it in the tar
Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> > no. after beta4 i want to move into more strict regimen
> > restricting more to "fix bug #xxx" commits.
> >
> > > I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using
> > > lyxpak.py to export may still be a good idea for 2.0.
> >
> > for sure i have no
On 05/02/2011 15:07, Richard Heck wrote:
On 02/05/2011 06:51 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using
lyxpak.py to export may still be a good idea for 2.0.
for sure i have no problem including it in the tarball.
If I'm not mistaken, it is
On 02/05/2011 06:51 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using
lyxpak.py to export may still be a good idea for 2.0.
for sure i have no problem including it in the tarball.
If I'm not mistaken, it is already in the tarball.
I don't think it
I'm breaking my resolution to not interfer in this discussion, but I could
not resist. However, this will be my first and last post on the subject.
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 02:32:20AM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Richard Heck wrote:
> > On 02/04/2011 05:23 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> >>
> >
Richard Heck wrote:
> On 02/04/2011 05:23 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>>
>> http://www.gitorious.org/lyx/lyx/commits/embedded-files
>>
> So I guess the question is: Is there any chance this will make it into 2.0?
no. after beta4 i want to move into more strict regimen
restricting more to "f
On 02/04/2011 05:23 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
http://www.gitorious.org/lyx/lyx/commits/embedded-files
So I guess the question is: Is there any chance this will make it into
2.0? I'm guessing the answer at this point is "No", in which case using
lyxpak.py to export may still be a good
http://www.gitorious.org/lyx/lyx/commits/embedded-files
Vincent
On 04/02/2011 18:50, Richard Heck wrote:
On 02/04/2011 12:44 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Richard Heck wrote:
On 02/03/2011 07:52 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
How to export the minimal set of files necessary to have a working
LyX
document?
i'm not s
On 02/04/2011 12:44 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Richard Heck wrote:
On 02/03/2011 07:52 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
How to export the minimal set of files necessary to have a working LyX
document?
i'm not sure it will wor
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 02/03/2011 07:52 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>>
>> Paul Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>> How to export the minimal set of files necessary to have a working LyX
>>> document?
>>
>> i'm not sure it will work, but you may want to look on lyxpak.py which
>> st
On 02/03/2011 07:52 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
How to export the minimal set of files necessary to have a working LyX document?
i'm not sure it will work, but you may want to look on lyxpak.py which states:
# This script creates a tar or zip archive with a lyx file and all incl
Paul Johnson wrote:
> How to export the minimal set of files necessary to have a working LyX
> document?
i'm not sure it will work, but you may want to look on lyxpak.py which states:
# This script creates a tar or zip archive with a lyx file and all included
# files (graphics and so on). A zip
19 matches
Mail list logo
