On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 10:11:55AM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 11:04:41AM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>
> > with Lars decisions of just droping some features! About the minipages I
> > don't have any open bug assigned telling me that there are problems with
> > them, so?!
>
On 28-May-2002 John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 11:04:41AM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>
>> with Lars decisions of just droping some features! About the minipages I
>> don't have any open bug assigned telling me that there are problems with
>> them, so?!
>
> bug 374, 375, 376 are a c
On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 11:04:41AM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> with Lars decisions of just droping some features! About the minipages I
> don't have any open bug assigned telling me that there are problems with
> them, so?!
bug 374, 375, 376 are a couple of examples. I don't know if all of the
On 28-May-2002 John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 10:43:42AM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>
>> Well I disagree in return. It seems we have different opinions about
>> will be supported and I'm pretty sure external scripts get not enough
>> support!
>
> Well, our minipage and floatflt su
On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 10:43:42AM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> Well I disagree in return. It seems we have different opinions about
> will be supported and I'm pretty sure external scripts get not enough
> support!
Well, our minipage and floatflt support in 1.2.0 wasn't too great was it
?
reg
On 28-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> I disagree...
>
> A script that translates between two _specific_ lyx-format versions
> does not really have to know all the semantics of a lyx file.
You mean it has to only know the parts which changed between formats?
Well then give someone a good
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 27-May-2002 John Levon wrote:
>> On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 06:26:06PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote:
>>
>>> A conversion script does not need to understand all the tokens in the .lyx
>>> file.
>>
>> Indeed. An external script is definitely the best way. Th
On 27-May-2002 John Levon wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 06:26:06PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote:
>
>> A conversion script does not need to understand all the tokens in the .lyx
>> file.
>
> Indeed. An external script is definitely the best way. Thins like
> tabular-old.C are just a painful mainte
> No. 1.2.0 is compatible with 1.1.5 and 1.1.6, 1.3.0 will be compatible
> with 1.2.0.
>
> By requiring that 1.3.0 must be compatible with 1.1.6 we effetively
> stops all fileformat cleanup and changes. And it was a real
> bee-hive... not nice code at all.
I agree with Lars. All compatibility ha
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 06:26:06PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> A conversion script does not need to understand all the tokens in the .lyx
> file.
Indeed. An external script is definitely the best way. Thins like
tabular-old.C are just a painful maintenance burden.
regards
john
--
"Time is a gr
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 04:02:23PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 03:37:15PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> > we do not want this stuff in LyX. sed,awk,python,perl are the place to
> > do this.
>
> But only LyX can read .lyx.
>
> Re-creating parser would be a major p
> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Could you elaborate this? I think we CAN have this in lyx (at
Juergen> least starting from the version we support with 1.2.0). Why
Juergen> should 1 additional file give any more problems? It's
Juergen> isolated and if you don'
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 03:37:15PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> we do not want this stuff in LyX. sed,awk,python,perl are the place to
> do this.
But only LyX can read .lyx.
Re-creating parser would be a major pain.
Why not taking a snapshot of 1.2.0 CVS and creating a script 'lyx116to1
On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>| Otherwise we just move all the compatibility stuff
>| in a "old_format_read.C" and if we see that "version < our_favoured_version"
>| we just call the function in that file appart.
>
> we do not want this stuff in LyX. sed,awk,python,perl are the pla
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
>> If your file was in 1.2.0 format it should be no probles, and if it is
>> you have found a bug.
>
| ??? What file? I just launched lyx and did "File->New...". "I" may know that
| we are reading a default.ly
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| Lars> Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars> | On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
|
On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> If your file was in 1.2.0 format it should be no probles, and if it is
> you have found a bug.
??? What file? I just launched lyx and did "File->New...". "I" may know that
we are reading a default.lyx file, but are you willing to tell it to every
user
On 27-May-2002 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "Jules" == Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Jules> Please at least ship a utility which can read 1.1.6 files! One
> Jules> of the reasons that I use free software tools over MS crap is
> Jules> that it is less susceptible to bit-rot. I
> "Jules" == Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jules> Please at least ship a utility which can read 1.1.6 files! One
Jules> of the reasons that I use free software tools over MS crap is
Jules> that it is less susceptible to bit-rot. I don't want the
Jules> letters I wrote a year or two a
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 01:04:12PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>
> By requiring that 1.3.0 must be compatible with 1.1.6 we effetively
> stops all fileformat cleanup and changes. And it was a real
> bee-hive... not nice code at all.
Please at least ship a utility which can read 1.1.6 fil
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| Juergen> On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>>> | Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
>>> | Juergen> supported file ;) Jug
>>> | It may be yo
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> | On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>>> | Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
>>> | Juergen> supported file ;) Jug
>>> | It may be your d
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>>| Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
>>| Juergen> supported file ;) Jug
>>>
>>| It may be your default.lyx template...
>
| Well whatever it is the message is just plain stupid to
> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> | Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
>> | Juergen> supported file ;) Jug
>>>
>> | It may be your default.lyx template...
Juergen> Well whatever it is t
On 27-May-2002 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>| Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
>| Juergen> supported file ;) Jug
>>
>| It may be your default.lyx template...
Well whatever it is the message is just plain stupid to me. I create
a "new" file! If this is a problem for
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
| Juergen> supported file ;) Jug
>
| It may be your default.lyx template...
I also see that from the templates that
> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Well it seems with "New..." we want now open an old not
Juergen> supported file ;) Jug
It may be your default.lyx template...
JMarc
27 matches
Mail list logo
