On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 05:59:07AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> And as usual the biggest expenditure of resources would be on the
> diplomatic effort to turn around/get around the naysayers. Hey, this is
> free software! People spend their personal resources as they see fit.
>
> Sorry... just ge
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 10:50:52AM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> This is great yes and I am very happy about that :-)
> But, as a side note, I would like to point out that the controller
> framework seems overly complicated to me. I remember that while
> developing the Qt4 frontend I found my
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> The problem is to make it easy for contributers to build binaries for
> us.
Building Qt4 is much simpler than building LyX. So whoever is able to
build LyX could build Qt4 by himself.
Andre'
Am Freitag, 10. März 2006 09:54 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> (also related to this: I have some of the procedures to do rebasing
> instead for merging on branches ready. This makes working on long
> lived branches easier, and keeps the history a bit better. That is the
> idea at least.)
Can you
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| Lars> I use it a bit... it compiles a lot faster (I know lousy reason)
|
| Not so lousy.
|
| But you will maybe like it less when it comes to support unicode...
|
| The questi
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> I use it a bit... it compiles a lot faster (I know lousy reason)
Not so lousy.
But you will maybe like it less when it comes to support unicode...
The question is to know what we gain by removing it.
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| Lars> I think it would be quite ok to drop qt2 support for 1.5, so
| Lars> that we only have worry about qt3 (and qt4)
|
| Sure.
|
| And probably drop xforms too. We could mayb
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> I think it would be quite ok to drop qt2 support for 1.5, so
Lars> that we only have worry about qt3 (and qt4)
Sure.
And probably drop xforms too. We could maybe poll a bit lyx-users to
know who uses xforms.
JMarc
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> There might be some conversion issue with the ui files. Fron what I
> gathered in the README, those have nether been edited with Qt3 designer,
> have they?
As far is I know, they never have been edited with Qt3 designer. At least we
have been very careful that no one di
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> There might be some conversion issue with the ui files. Fron what I
> gathered in the README, those have nether been edited with Qt3 designer,
> have they?
This is what I doubt. But it should be true for most of them. Anyway, there
is no need to convert them explicitly,
Angus Leeming a écrit :
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think it would be quite ok to drop qt2 support for 1.5, so that we
only have worry about qt3 (and qt4)
This may have happened already. I would not be surprised if 1.4 would not
work with qt 2 anymore. AFAIK it is some time ago s
Angus Leeming wrote:
> Then rename the folder as qt3 and remove any "#ifdef QT2" type workarounds.
I agree.
Jürgen
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it would be quite ok to drop qt2 support for 1.5, so that we
> > only have worry about qt3 (and qt4)
> This may have happened already. I would not be surprised if 1.4 would not
> work with qt 2 anymore. AFAIK it is some time ago since somebody com
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> I think it would be quite ok to drop qt2 support for 1.5, so that we
> only have worry about qt3 (and qt4)
This may have happened already. I would not be surprised if 1.4 would not
work with qt 2 anymore. AFAIK it is some time ago since somebody compiled
LyX 1.4 for w
Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
| > Of course there are many wonderful improvements wrt 1.3 I am not denying
| > that. But if you think that the reason why the qt2 frontend stalled
| > after the polishing is that it is mature as it is then we should not
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Juergen Spitzmueller a écrit :
>> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>>> If you talk about the gtk and qt4 frontends I agree but when I
>>> look at the qt2 frontend, I don't see much development in cvs
>>> history in the last tw
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 09:54 +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > | Another BTW: when will be have the 'personal' or 'sandbox' branch
| > | directory? We have SVN now but psychologically we're still i
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Of course there are many wonderful improvements wrt 1.3 I am not denying
> that. But if you think that the reason why the qt2 frontend stalled
> after the polishing is that it is mature as it is then we should not add
> any new feature to it, should we? just kidding ;-)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 09:54 +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Another BTW: when will be have the 'personal' or 'sandbox' branch
> | directory? We have SVN now but psychologically we're still in CVS.
>
> I can create it right now if you want it.
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 10:50 +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer a écrit :
...
> > BTW on a side note: did anybody else notice how good it is that we have
> > GUI front-end independence, even if one would hold that having multiple
> > front-ends is undesirable: LyX contains a number of
Juergen Spitzmueller a écrit :
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
If you talk about the gtk and qt4 frontends I agree but when I look at
the qt2 frontend, I don't see much development in cvs history in the
last two years.
Perhaps because we think it is quite mature as it is? We surely did some
polishin
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> If you talk about the gtk and qt4 frontends I agree but when I look at
> the qt2 frontend, I don't see much development in cvs history in the
> last two years.
Perhaps because we think it is quite mature as it is? We surely did some
polishing. You'll notice that if you
Martin Vermeer a écrit :
I belive that qt3 will stay of a (long) while yet.
That's it... what I don't like is opposing an agreed good idea with the
argument "don't you have anything better to do".
Well, it is surely a good idea for the user but, if you look for fun
coding, you will enjoy Qt4
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Another BTW: when will be have the 'personal' or 'sandbox' branch
| directory? We have SVN now but psychologically we're still in CVS.
I can create it right now if you want it.
(I need it myself aswell... for the xml branch)
(also related to this: I
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 08:39 +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > Any work on this scale on the qt3 frontend is a waste of resources.
> |
> | And as usual the biggest expenditure of resources would be on the
> | diplomatic effort to turn around/get
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > Any work on this scale on the qt3 frontend is a waste of resources.
|
| And as usual the biggest expenditure of resources would be on the
| diplomatic effort to turn around/get around the naysayers. Hey, this is
| free software! People spend their pe
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 06:15:38PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 03:24:14PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > Martin Vermeer a écrit :
> > >On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 11:45 +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > >>Martin Vermeer a écrit :
...
> > >>All this would need a few addi
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> That would be great and would solve the portability issue of autotools.
> Is there some tools to convert autotools script to cmake?
>
http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdesdk/scripts/cmake/am2cmake?rev=516914&view=log
seems to be specific for kde
Cheers,
Charles
--
htt
On Thursday 09 March 2006 17:15, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Any work on this scale on the qt3 frontend is a waste of resources.
I agree, FWIW.
> Andre'
--
José Abílio
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 03:24:14PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer a écrit :
> >On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 11:45 +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >>Martin Vermeer a écrit :
> >>>On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 09:52 +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >"Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL
Charles de Miramon a écrit :
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Having dock widgets/sidebars would be great for many dialogs (the
crossrefs or error dialogs come to mind).
http://doc.trolltech.com/4.1/qt4-mainwindow.html
Feel free to look at the qt4 frontend ;-)
A docking interface would
Charles de Miramon a écrit :
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Having dock widgets/sidebars would be great for many dialogs (the
crossrefs or error dialogs come to mind).
http://doc.trolltech.com/4.1/qt4-mainwindow.html
Feel free to look at the qt4 frontend ;-)
A docking interface would
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
> Having dock widgets/sidebars would be great for many dialogs (the
> crossrefs or error dialogs come to mind).
>
http://doc.trolltech.com/4.1/qt4-mainwindow.html
A docking interface would be great for LyX. There are some nice ideas in
Koffice design competition
ht
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> I have plans to make the Qt4 Toc dialog a dock widget
Abdelrazak> instead of a windows and transform that into an outlining
Abdelrazak> tool.
Having dock widgets/sidebars would be great for many dialogs (the
crossref
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
>>> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Or we can just statically compile until Qt4 is in the
Abdelrazak> distribution. By the time 1.5 is out, I
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
"Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Or we can just statically compile until Qt4 is in the
Abdelrazak> distribution. By the time 1.5 is out, I am sure that all
Abdelrazak> distrib will have it.
We are not only aiming at people
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Or we can just statically compile until Qt4 is in the
Abdelrazak> distribution. By the time 1.5 is out, I am sure that all
Abdelrazak> distrib will have it.
We are not only aiming at people who have a distrib that is
Martin Vermeer a écrit :
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 11:45 +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Martin Vermeer a écrit :
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 09:52 +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
What would be _much_ easier however is to make this possib
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 11:45 +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer a écrit :
> > On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 09:52 +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
> >> What would be _much_ easier however is to make this possible through
Martin Vermeer a écrit :
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 09:52 +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> Shouldn't be too hard. Already sectioning commands for XML
Martin> contain a CommandDepth parameter. This could be used on the
Martin> LaTeX sid
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| (Did klyx have outlining? That confirms that it cannot be so hard.)
But klyx had a lot of hacks...
--
Lgb
> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> (Did klyx have outlining? That confirms that it cannot be so
Martin> hard.)
Yes, in the ToC dialog.
JMarc
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 09:52 +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Martin> Shouldn't be too hard. Already sectioning commands for XML
> Martin> contain a CommandDepth parameter. This could be used on the
> Martin> LaTeX side too.
>
>
> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> Shouldn't be too hard. Already sectioning commands for XML
Martin> contain a CommandDepth parameter. This could be used on the
Martin> LaTeX side too.
We have TocLevel for numbered sections.
Martin> output_docbook contains a r
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 09:26 +0100, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Charles de Miramon wrote:
>
> >Angus Leeming wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Charles Fox wrote:
...
> There should be no efficiency problems with an outline mode in lyx.
> And for those that don't like outline modes - well don't use it. :-) A
Charles de Miramon wrote:
Angus Leeming wrote:
Charles Fox wrote:
Dear LyX Developers,
I am a PhD student who will be starting to write a thesis in a couple
of months time. I'd love to use LyX, but there is one feature missing
that I really need: an outline mode. Like MS Word, I'
Angus Leeming wrote:
> Charles Fox wrote:
>> Dear LyX Developers,
>>
>> I am a PhD student who will be starting to write a thesis in a couple
>> of months time. I'd love to use LyX, but there is one feature missing
>> that I really need: an outline mode. Like MS Word, I'd like to be
>> able t
Charles Fox wrote:
Dear LyX Developers,
I am a PhD student who will be starting to write a thesis in a couple
of months time. I'd love to use LyX, but there is one feature missing
that I really need: an outline mode. Like MS Word, I'd like to be
able to see and /quickly edit in place/ the do
Charles Fox a écrit :
Dear LyX Developers,
[...]
I am just a PhD student but I could pay maybe $120 to someone who
knows the code and could write this feature in the next couple of
months.
I have something like this in my todo list but maybe not in the next
couple of month.
Hopefully it
49 matches
Mail list logo
