Pavel Sanda wrote:
> hi,
>
> time to think about beta3.
> there is already a couple of things which need to be released
> and tested so we should start freezing at certain time.
friday night i would like to freeze trunk, let it for testing
during the weekend and release new beta in sun/mon...
p
>> That's why I think more people should be involved so that Uwe, myself and
maybe some others
>> will at least be reasonable familiar with the code.
>
> I want to get familiar with the code. It would be nice if I could brew the
installers as well.
> So, if you will explain what is necessary and
On 12/22/2010 7:31 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Could you at least take care that there are installers available for
further LyX releases until I'm back. I can try to build my installer
from abroad, but I cannot promise this.
I don't expect to have time to write a new installer for 2.0 in Jan-Feb.
Als
> Unfortunately my current job keeps me extremely busy so I'm not sure when
I'll have time to work
> on this. I will try to start working on some documentation for the build
process so Uwe and other
> people will also be able to compile LyX with the latest versions of the
external dependencies
> - documentation. Uwe, do you have some expectation about
> the time you need/want, so the docs are in good shape
> in your view?
All issues in this list which are marked green are already well documented:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20
I update the docs step by step. 2 weeks ago I finis
I would be happy to contribute but I need to understand what's wrong with the
current NSIS script.
Why do we still use other installers if the NSIS script is ready?
Joost, you said it should be rewritten, why? What's missing?
Could we put together a list of things the installer should do?
Sorry f
Am 22.12.2010 um 01:53 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> Stephan Witt wrote:
>> What's your opinion regarding the SystemCall patch?
>> I have it at hand. The idea was to be able to collect the
>> standard and error output of external startscript().
>
> thought i already commented on this...
> the patch its
On 12/21/2010 4:39 PM, veno...@arcadiaclub.com wrote:
That's why I think more people should be involved so that Uwe, myself
and maybe some others will at least be reasonable familiar
with the code.
If you give me all the necessary info maybe I can help and familiarize with
NSIS. I'm pretty expe
Stephan Witt wrote:
> What's your opinion regarding the SystemCall patch?
> I have it at hand. The idea was to be able to collect the
> standard and error output of external startscript().
thought i already commented on this...
the patch itself is good thing to do but should go to trunk but for 2
> That's why I think more people should be involved so that Uwe, myself
> and maybe some others will at least be reasonable familiar
> with the code.
If you give me all the necessary info maybe I can help and familiarize with
NSIS. I'm pretty experienced under Windows, but never get in touch wit
Am 21.12.2010 um 00:48 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> hi,
>
> time to think about beta3.
> there is already a couple of things which need to be released
> and tested so we should start freezing at certain time.
>
> are there some particular issues you want to push in trunk
> before next beta?
As you k
Joost Verburg wrote:
> I still believe the best way forward is to start with the CMake build tools
> and the new libraries I've recently ported to Visual C++
i also think this is the best approach in long term.
> The question is whether this is feasible for 2.0. Perhaps I could start
> with bu
Op 21-12-2010 2:27, Joost Verburg schreef:
On 12/20/2010 7:40 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
although all the advantages above look like very good step forward
i'm afraid
there is nobody around who is going to write new NSIS code (i suppose
Uwe is
not going to leave his code for some unfinished stuff
On 12/20/2010 7:40 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
although all the advantages above look like very good step forward i'm afraid
there is nobody around who is going to write new NSIS code (i suppose Uwe is
not going to leave his code for some unfinished stuff he is not familiar with.)
That's why I think
Joost Verburg wrote:
> Unfortunately my current job keeps me extremely busy so I'm not sure when
> I'll have time to work on this. I will try to start working on some
although all the advantages above look like very good step forward i'm afraid
there is nobody around who is going to write new NS
On 12/20/2010 6:48 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
- windows installers. Joost, are there some advances in the
announced 'joint' installer, so we no more proceed with
the doublet official/alternative? or do we continue with
the current 1.6 model? any way we should start to offer
*some* officia
hi,
time to think about beta3.
there is already a couple of things which need to be released
and tested so we should start freezing at certain time.
are there some particular issues you want to push in trunk
before next beta?
we reduced from 3 pages of bugs with 2.0 milestone to nearly
one pag
17 matches
Mail list logo
