As I wrote in a later post I updated the page directly after this message, so
it is no longer outdated.
Thanks. If you have put all you know there, I guess it is at least
clear now what is missing in the official installer.
Bo
Bo Peng schrieb:
This is not the case, see also my just send post!
I will paste your previous post to my thread.
However, that wiki page *is* outdated. Last time when I cited that
page, you have a lot of 'please ignore this' in
http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg109675.html
This is not the case, see also my just send post!
I will paste your previous post to my thread.
However, that wiki page *is* outdated. Last time when I cited that
page, you have a lot of 'please ignore this' in
http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg109675.html .
Also, please a
Joost Verburg schrieb:
Do you think users are able to understand the differences?
Yes, the already can. I've a stable user base for my installer now (looking at
the download statistics).
The list you provide on your wiki page looks outdated as almost everything is already
in the official in
Joost Verburg schrieb:
You find the list as always here:
http://wiki.lyx.org/Windows/LyXWinInstaller
Almost all things in this list are already in the official installer:
(PDF viewing without closing the reader
But it seems you close it another way so that jumping back to the position where
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Joost Verburg wrote:
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Yes teamwork is always a good thing, but this is only possible when more
then one person understands the code. (Btw. I therefore invested some time
to make my code as simple and well documented as possible as also others
use my code
Bo Peng wrote:
Uwe, please list what you think the official installer is lacking to
my thread 'suggestions to the official windows installer' and update
this page accordingly. I guess not everyone here, for or against your
proposal, knows the differences.
I think the differences are quite small
> You find the list as always here:
> http://wiki.lyx.org/Windows/LyXWinInstaller
Almost all things in this list are already in the official installer
This page is obsolete and can give users a false impression against
the official installer.
Uwe, please list what you think the official instal
I wonder about some phrases: Joost, Bo "... it is unacceptable to me ..."
Have I missed something? Where are we? Isn't this an open source project
any more? Are you now the managers who I have to ask?
Please check your language.
I speak for myself. Something is unacceptable to me does not have
First, Asger, please state clearly that you are happy with choosing
from four installers, or two installers (minimal/Joost, full/Uwe) with
more differences than bundling or not. After all, this is what this
proposal about.
Therefore, I think Joost's installer should be properly documented such
t
> "Joost" == Joost Verburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joost> Sometimes a more advanced piece of code is required in order to
Joost> make things more reliable or to handle every possible situation
Joost> (including silent installation, installation without
Joost> administrative privileges, det
> "Uwe" == Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uwe> Yes teamwork is always a good thing, but this is only possible
Uwe> when more then one person understands the code. (Btw. I therefore
Uwe> invested some time to make my code as simple and well documented
Uwe> as possible as also others use
> "Uwe" == Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uwe> (Btw. it would help a lot if every function/macro call is
Uwe> explained, at least where the fuction is defined.)
This is a very important point. We need code that tries to be
correctly commented (I know that LyX code in itself is not alwa
> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>>> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
Peter> Ever heard about different build systems in trunk? ;)
>> Build systems are for developers, not end-users.
Peter> Sorry, I didn't know
Joost Verburg wrote:
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Yes teamwork is always a good thing, but this is only possible when
more then one person understands the code. (Btw. I therefore invested
some time to make my code as simple and well documented as possible as
also others use my code and I know that there c
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
I don't see a problem of having two different installers, either
following my proposal or like the current situation where the users can
choose between an installer they like. Both will be freedom of choice.
Do you think users are able to understand the differences? The list y
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
There is also the official bundled installed. Why don't you want your
features to be merged with that one?
I have never said this. I just don't want to fight again and again to
have features included that are already there. For example the MiKTeX
stuff is there since August (
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Yes teamwork is always a good thing, but this is only possible when more
then one person understands the code. (Btw. I therefore invested some
time to make my code as simple and well documented as possible as also
others use my code and I know that there could be much more done
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Joost Verburg schrieb:
>
>
>>
>> Two entirely different scripts for the two installers is unacceptable
>> for me. It would mean that the installers have different bugs, behave
>> differently etc. That is really difficult to maintain.
I wonder about some phrases: Joost, Bo "...
What is the most important in an open source project?
- The code?
- The developers?
- What the users think?
Well, I guess all of these things are important.
So, let's look at the installers on these accounts:
- Uwe's installer is simple code and works.
- Uwe's has been the most stable developm
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes schrieb:
Uwe> I don't think its worth to invest lots of time again to be able to
Uwe> do this with the same code base.
Uwe> Merging the code to have all features in one script wil cost lot
Uwe> of time,
> Uwe> I fear that I then loose the overview and that it will be hard
Joost Verburg schrieb:
Two entirely different scripts for the two installers is unacceptable
for me. It would mean that the installers have different bugs, behave
differently etc. That is really difficult to maintain.
My problem is that I'm perhaps technically limited to uderstand your cod
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Peter> Ever heard about different build systems in trunk? ;)
>
> Build systems are for developers, not end-users.
>
> JMarc
>
Sorry, I didn't know that the end-user uses the
installer code of trunk.
On 1/30/07, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Ever heard about different build systems in trunk? ;)
Build systems are for developers, not end-users.
Cyber-hugs from Bo.
Bo
Joost, I'm curious... I don't like placing other packages that are to be
bundled in SVN, but where/how does your bundled installer get them when it
is time to generate the installer? Does some script first download them?
From what I have seen, there is a variable, if defined, let the script
g
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Joost Verburg wrote:
That means the better NSIS script structure from the current official
installer, all the features of the LyXWinInstaller, support for
installation by restricted users, a good integration with LyX SVN and
the build tools (with no binaries in SVN) and th
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Merging the code to have all features in one script wil cost lot of time,
> I fear that I then loose the overview and that it will be hard to
> maintain. Having two scripts for two different way doesn't harm.
> (Personylly I usually work this way also at work: Use a different
>
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Martin Vermeer wrote:
... was bad. Bad Bo!
My sister has a dog called Bo ;-)
I'm glad someone got it exactly as I intended it :-)
/C
--
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
> "Uwe" == Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 2. keep Joost's full installer but add Uwe's improvements. I prefer
>> Joost's installer because it uses the same code as 1. This means
>> less maintenance.
Uwe> That's OK four you but I prefer to have something that is useful
Uwe> for most
> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Ever heard about different build systems in trunk? ;)
Build systems are for developers, not end-users.
JMarc
On Sun, 2007-01-28 at 11:51 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
>
> >> I think your attack was bad. Naugthy Bo, bad Bo! SCNR :-)
> >
> > I am too old to be called naughty
>
> I apologize for that, I got carried away and I was really only trying for
> a comic e
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
OK, there are two different ways to build the installer:
- Mine: bundling everything that is needed, so the user can download it
one or I can provide a CD and then they only have to click Next a few
times and they have a full featured LaTeX/LyX environment with
everything up
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
2. keep Joost's full installer but add Uwe's improvements. I prefer
Joost's installer because it uses the same code as 1. This means
less maintenance.
That's OK four you but I prefer to have something that is useful for
most of the users and if t
Peter Kümmel wrote:
Bo Peng wrote:
Sounds a bit provoking,
I apologize. Having your installer in a repository would certainly
help you. My point is that if it is not official, it would better in a
place other than trunk.
What's the problem with trunk, I don't care about a additional folder
in
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Peter Kümmel wrote:
I apologize. Having your installer in a repository would certainly help
you. My point is that if it is not official, it would better in a place
other than trunk.
What's the problem with trunk, I don't care about a additional folder in
/development.
Bo Peng wrote:
>> Sounds a bit provoking,
>
> I apologize. Having your installer in a repository would certainly
> help you. My point is that if it is not official, it would better in a
> place other than trunk.
What's the problem with trunk, I don't care about a additional folder
in /development
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Q:... Can either of the installers be used to upgrade a LyX installation?
In other words, what
happens if there already is a LyX installation?
If LyX's version number is different the existing LyX is kept untouched
and can be used side by side with the
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
Btw. I was never able to convince somebody with prior LaTeX knowledge to
use LyX. They don't want to
work with a program that is desinged to hide LaTeX for the users, funny
but the truth.
I converted two emacs latex-ers, and a few SWP-ers.
I've never b
Sounds a bit provoking,
I apologize. Having your installer in a repository would certainly
help you. My point is that if it is not official, it would better in a
place other than trunk.
- Mine: bundling everything that is needed, so the user can download it one or
I can provide a CD
and then
Bo Peng schrieb:
I propose that
1. we keep Joost's minial installer (8M), which installs lyx only and
optionally download all components.
That's what I also proposed but additionally:
>> 3. When a new LyX is released the official "LyX-installer" as well as
>> the "LyX-distribution" (the
>> th
> Q:... Can either of the installers be used to upgrade a LyX installation? In
other words, what
> happens if there already is a LyX installation?
If LyX's version number is different the existing LyX is kept untouched and can be used side by side
with the new installer version.
I will implem
Btw. I was never able to convince somebody with prior LaTeX knowledge to use
LyX. They don't want to
work with a program that is desinged to hide LaTeX for the users, funny but the
truth.
I converted two emacs latex-ers, and a few SWP-ers.
Bo
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
>>> The kind of installer I expect almost everyone would use is a bundle
> installer that installs the
>>> LyX application as well as a bunch of other useful applications.
>>
>> not so sure, i think that many (most?) people who install (try out)
> lyx for the 1st time will be
>> la
>> The kind of installer I expect almost everyone would use is a bundle
installer that installs the
>> LyX application as well as a bunch of other useful applications.
>
> not so sure, i think that many (most?) people who install (try out) lyx for
the 1st time will be
> latex users and will have
> When I used LyX regularly, I used to show it to my PhD colleagues (not
> LaTeX users) and they were usually impressed. If there had been a bundle
> installer at the time I think it would have been quite easy to get them to
> try it. It might even have been possible to get my supervisor to use
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes it does. While cooling down in reading your email I came to the
proposal I just posted.
There's been so much traffic... which post is this?
Oops, now I saw it. Never mind.
/C
--
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Bo was in a bad mood... but I personally feel that you should not
restrain yourself when humour is involved. At the end of the day, we're
trying to have fun while doing something useful for the greater good of
humanity and the entire universe, aren
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
.. this is then the definite line.
I now have
- Python, ImageMagick, and Ghostscript (bundled, not separately
installed because only the needed files are bundled)
Please correct me if I've gotten this wrong:
* Python, ImageMagick and Ghostscript are
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Just a minor thought regarding FTP-servers that are down. What would
you think about storing a copy of the packages on e.g. ftp.lyx.org?
I don't think we should do this. We surely have enough traffic and also
lyx.org is sometimes down.
I know all the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
I think your attack was bad. Naugthy Bo, bad Bo! SCNR :-)
I am too old to be called naughty
I apologize for that, I got carried away and I was really only trying
for a comic effect with alliteration. Maybe it should just have b
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
I guess Joost is at a better position to comment on this but talking
about whose installer is kind of silly for a GPL project. We have to
call Joost or Uwe's installer because we have two now.
I agree. What we need is to achieve consensus. And I think there
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
I think your attack was bad. Naugthy Bo, bad Bo! SCNR :-)
I am too old to be called naughty
I apologize for that, I got carried away and I was really only trying for
a comic effect with alliteration. Maybe it should just have been
... was bad.
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Edwin Leuven wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think we probably should supply a minimal installer for LyX, i.e.
something that installs the LyX application and nothing else.
note that joost's installer basically works like this by skipping the
download of the componen
Bo Peng wrote:
1. we keep Joost's minial installer (8M), which installs lyx only and
optionally download all components. I like Joost's installer because
it can be compiled directly from a fresh svn tree (no IM etc), using
as simple as 'scons installer', and it does not require admin
privilege.
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 05:11:48PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Uwe Stöhr wrote:
>
> >So let me be frank this one time:
> >
> >Joost took my installer code and modified it on his own without
> >informing me what and why he has changed things. Then he upload it to
> >SVN and boom: We had a n
Bo Peng wrote:
I object. Both of the installers have minimal and full versions. We do
not need a second 'full featured' lyx-distribution. I propose that
1. we keep Joost's minial installer (8M), which installs lyx only and
optionally download all components. I like Joost's installer because
it c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think we probably should supply a minimal installer for LyX, i.e.
something that installs the LyX application and nothing else.
note that joost's installer basically works like this by skipping the
download of the components...
Experts
might use it for this reason
Uwe,
I like your email, despite my objections.
1. Joost continues the official installer as it is. He has always had some nice
ideas to push LyX on
Windows forward! I only have one wish: Joost, could you announce your solutions
to the list please?
I'm always interested in the Windows stuff an
Christian wrote:
>>I designed the installer to be able to have a full functional LyX.
> With full functional LyX, I assume you mean "fully functional document
processing/preparation
> system" :-) I guess one problem is where to draw the line - should it include
drawing software
> for insta
To come to a decision I propose the following:
1. Joost continues the official installer as it is. He has always had some nice ideas to push LyX on
Windows forward! I only have one wish: Joost, could you announce your solutions to the list please?
I'm always interested in the Windows stuff and
I think your attack was bad. Naugthy Bo, bad Bo! SCNR :-)
I am too old to be called naughty, but I agree that I could be more
diplomatic. For various reasons, I have a strong feelings against
forking.
I've gotten the impression Uwe is upset because he feels Joost took his
code, got it in SVN
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Asger Ottar Alstrup wrote:
Choose between:
1) Click on a download link once, go and have coffee. Start the installer,
click Next, click Next, click Next, click Next, click Next. LyX is easy.
2) Click on a download link. Start the installer, read what it says, choose
to
Hi Bo,
I found it a difficult to get the feeling/purpose behind your post... I
wouldn't be surprised if it (or its purpose) is misunderstood. So take my
response in that vein - at least I start from the approach that probably
have gotten you completely wrong :-)
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Bo Peng
Apologies for the long post. In my defense, it took a while to create and
I gave it some thought.
First I'd like to say something I think holds for Windows users:
Most of them us will want to install several additional
packages. The majority probably won't even be interested in selecting
which
Bo Peng wrote:
Then, what if you believe you are right, and obviously some users and
developers are at your side, but a bad guy named Bo just does not get
it? You need to realize that Bo speaks only for himself, and his
opinion is as important as yours.
Abdel thinks that there's some truth in
Uwe,
It is a pity that you decide to maintain your own installer. Although
not everyone agrees with my attack to your inclusion of
LyxWinInstaller in the trunk, I am pretty sure that nobody likes
having two independent windows installers.
Your decision makes me wonder what I would do if I am in
Am Samstag, 27. Januar 2007 16:44 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> Bo Peng schrieb:
>
> > Also, in theory, lyx can function without Ghostscript and ImageMagick.
>
> But only in theory! LyX without Imagemagick is practically useless.
For many people, yes, but this is not true in general. I know somebody who
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
So let me be frank this one time:
Joost took my installer code and modified it on his own without
informing me what and why he has changed things. Then he upload it to
SVN and boom: We had a new official LyX installer!
This was a real shock because I worked well together with
Bo Peng schrieb:
Also, in theory, lyx can function without Ghostscript and ImageMagick.
But only in theory! LyX without Imagemagick is practically useless.
More important is the support: I started the installer without
having the needed programs included
but this lead to lots of unnecessary
John McCabe-Dansted schrieb:
Acrobat really doesn't work with the default LyX behavior, especially
the windows version, so fixing that would be a high priority on the
windows side. I am not convinced that the behavior is correct for
other applications either.
The fix only affects Acrobat/Adobe
On 1/27/07, Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2) Click on a download link. Start the installer, read > choose to download,
click next. LyX is crap.
Finally, a batch file is written and
http://www.lyx.org/~bpeng/LyX-1.5.0svn-2007-01-26-Installer.exe is
only a double-click away from my mouse.
2) Click on a download link. Start the installer, read > choose to download,
click next. LyX is crap.
I doubt if you have ever tried the official installer.
Bo
Choose between:
1) Click on a download link once, go and have coffee. Start the
installer, click Next, click Next, click Next, click Next, click Next.
LyX is easy.
2) Click on a download link. Start the installer, read what it says,
choose to download, click next, wait a long time, then read
On Friday 26 January 2007 12:01:30 am Angus Leeming wrote:
> Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >* The installer sets InstantPreview-graphics a bit larger as this
> > > was often requested by users.
> > >
> > > So only windows users have bad eyesight?
> >
> > I've never understood why th
Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >* The installer sets InstantPreview-graphics a bit larger as this was
> > often requested by users.
> > So only windows users have bad eyesight?
> I've never understood why the default is 0.9 instead of 1.0 scaling.
> Seems to be a relict of the t
> More important is the support: ...
I think Bo was worried that having to deal with all these other packages
makes for a big work load for the developers. You seem to think the
opposite, i.e. that it's less work to bundle the packages because it
results in less questions from the user... Interes
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
I designed the installer to be able to have a full functional LyX.
With full functional LyX, I assume you mean "fully functional document
processing/preparation system" :-) I guess one problem is where to draw
the line - should it include drawi
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
Putting it in a separate project/tree/whatever might make sense, but not
in a branch.
This is what I meant, and .../personal seems appropriate. Calling it a
branch may be wrong since branch usually is a copy of trunk. In this
case, it is a standalone insta
Putting it in a separate project/tree/whatever might make sense, but not
in a branch.
This is what I meant, and .../personal seems appropriate. Calling it a
branch may be wrong since branch usually is a copy of trunk. In this
case, it is a standalone installer tree.
Sorry for the confusing.
Bo
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
"ben.bob"? (I could understand "ben.pog":-)
/C
--
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
When you say branch, do you mean like what we find here
http://www.lyx.org/trac/browser/lyx-devel/branches
http://www.lyx.org/trac/browser/lyx-devel/branches/personal
Then I don't think using a branch is the right way. One reason is that I
assu
When you say branch, do you mean like what we find here
http://www.lyx.org/trac/browser/lyx-devel/branches
http://www.lyx.org/trac/browser/lyx-devel/branches/personal
Bo
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
Uwe keep his bundled installer (or perhaps LyX distribution)
in SVN even if it isn't the *official* installer?
I have been rude so allow me to act like this one more time. IMHO,
svn/trunk is for the development of lyx that can include lyx-related
source fi
Uwe keep his bundled installer (or perhaps LyX distribution)
in SVN even if it isn't the *official* installer?
I have been rude so allow me to act like this one more time. IMHO,
svn/trunk is for the development of lyx that can include lyx-related
source files, development and packaging files. If
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
I'm not speaking against Joost, I really appreciate his work, he
pushed us a huge step forward with his work on Aspell, Aiksaurus, etc.
Create an installer that you want but support it! I'll remove my code
ASAP from SVN, sorry that my doing provoke this de
On 1/26/07, Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm trying to answer to some of the statememts in this thread:
Thanks.
It was surely my fault that I modified the appearance of LyX in
my installer in the past, but this is now no longer the case.
Great.
Joost doesn't deliver the Ghostscrip
On 1/25/07, Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You can't judge a book by its cover! I designed the installer to be able to
have a full functional
LyX. For this purpose I include all needed files from SVN's /lib directory and
this are about 20 MB
(uncompressed). Then there are of course the .e
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
I'm trying to answer to some of the statememts in this thread:
Uwe, I understand all of what you are saying here and I sympathize. But
I think it should be possible to modify Joost installer so that it can
bundle _optionally_ all required software or mandatory software.
Thi
I'm trying to answer to some of the statememts in this thread:
It was surely my fault that I modified the appearance of LyX in my installer in
the past, but this
is now no longer the case. I was very happy about the clean discussions about
these issues last week.
Concerning the installer size:
* The key word is customizability. One will never found an installer that all
agree is the one and only installer to use. The solution to this problem is
customizability: A user should have the opportunity to decide what parts of LyX
and third-party software that should be installed.
* Ideally
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For the future I suggest the following:
>
> - We have only one installer code base that is maintained in svn. If Joost
> does not reappear this will be Uwe's code. If Joost does reappear it is
> hopefully possible for Uwe and Joost to come to an agreement
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 10:29:42 am Bo Peng wrote:
> As I have said, this installer makes lyx behave differently from other
> platforms and cares too much about third-party applications. If other
> developers agree with me, Uwe has to remove all such things before it
> can be considered as the
So please let's continue this discussion in a reasonable manner.
We have agreed upon how official windows installer should behave.
Joost's installer became official because it complies to that
agreement. Now, suppose that Joost no longer supports his installer
and we need the new one, I would ex
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Georg Baum wrote:
IMO you are a real developer. Everybody puts his own emphasis as he
likes, and if that is not "hardcore LyX programming" but the
documentation or the installer this does not make it less useful.
Well put.
.. and that it took you a lot of time, and I am
Angus Leeming wrote:
Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
a displeased Uwe
p.s. for this email I define: Wednesday = Friday
And so you should. You've performed a sterling service from outside for too
long. I for one think you're ann absolute star.
+1
Abdel.
Uwe wrote:
And while we are discussing the installer question;
It makes me sick that nobody see the time that is needed for maintaining
the installer and the Windows stuff.
i think everybody agrees here that you are doing a fine job.
personally i prefer joost's installer because it is small (9
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> I'm surely not a real developer as you are but always did my best to
> improve LyX under Windows. So telling me I should more concentrate on LyX
> that I currently do frustrates me a bit.
IMO you are a real developer. Everybody puts his own emphasis as he likes,
and if that is
Angus Leeming wrote:
> And so you should. You've performed a sterling service from outside for
> too long. I for one think you're ann absolute star.
ACK. Without Uwe's effort, there would probably be no Win installer at all.
And he's proven that he's willing to remove things we do not want.
So p
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
>> OK, if we start to include Jabref and LaTeX2RTF, where do we stop?
>
>> That was my initial interaction with Uwe's inclusion of Jabref. It is
>> good to take care of user's need but Uwe's installer has gone too far
>> down that road in that it takes care of too many issues of t
Sorry but before you continue bashing me, please:
You did not reply my (and others') concerns directly. It is true that
new users, authors who wrote larger documents have their special
needs, but that does not have to mean we need to offer these features,
or you can add these features without as
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
