On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> wrote:
>> Le 21/05/2015 07:09, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>>
>>> We could also do this for the advanced find and the spell check
>>> dialogs. Toggling seems more intuitive to me for
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> Le 21/05/2015 07:09, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>
>> We could also do this for the advanced find and the spell check
>> dialogs. Toggling seems more intuitive to me for those also. Let me
>> know if others would want this change. If w
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> Le 21/05/2015 11:17, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>
>> Ah, I see what you mean. I will revert, and mark #8388 as 'wontfix'
>> unless there are objections. It does not seem useful to have two such
>> close bindings.
>
>
> Yes, I think thi
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:31 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> Le 21/05/2015 11:20, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>
>> Is it possible to close the outline? It would be nice if ESC did this.
>> Currently ESC puts the cursor back in the workarea which is a nice
>> function, but TAB can already be used
Le 21/05/2015 11:17, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
Ah, I see what you mean. I will revert, and mark #8388 as 'wontfix'
unless there are objections. It does not seem useful to have two such
close bindings.
Yes, I think this is the best we can do right now.
JMarc
Le 21/05/2015 11:20, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
Is it possible to close the outline? It would be nice if ESC did this.
Currently ESC puts the cursor back in the workarea which is a nice
function, but TAB can already be used for this.
Yes, I think that Esc should do it. OTOH, wouldn't it be usefu
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> wrote:
>> Le 21/05/2015 07:08, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>>
>>> commit bede4d320bfff26fcbea396b516b92eb9595940c
>>> Author: Scott Kostyshak
>>> Date: Thu May 21 00:59:08 2015 -040
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> Le 21/05/2015 07:08, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>
>> commit bede4d320bfff26fcbea396b516b92eb9595940c
>> Author: Scott Kostyshak
>> Date: Thu May 21 00:59:08 2015 -0400
>>
>> toc bind: 'dialog-show' -> 'dialog-toggle' (#8388)
>>
Le 21/05/2015 07:08, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
commit bede4d320bfff26fcbea396b516b92eb9595940c
Author: Scott Kostyshak
Date: Thu May 21 00:59:08 2015 -0400
toc bind: 'dialog-show' -> 'dialog-toggle' (#8388)
Toggling is more intuitive for this dialog.
There is one use that is not
Le 21/05/2015 07:09, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
We could also do this for the advanced find and the spell check
dialogs. Toggling seems more intuitive to me for those also. Let me
know if others would want this change. If we did that though, we might
want to change the menus to use toggling also (
Am Donnerstag, 21. Mai 2015 um 01:09:57, schrieb Scott Kostyshak
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > commit bede4d320bfff26fcbea396b516b92eb9595940c
> > Author: Scott Kostyshak
> > Date: Thu May 21 00:59:08 2015 -0400
> >
> > toc bind: 'dialog-show' -> 'dialog-to
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> commit bede4d320bfff26fcbea396b516b92eb9595940c
> Author: Scott Kostyshak
> Date: Thu May 21 00:59:08 2015 -0400
>
> toc bind: 'dialog-show' -> 'dialog-toggle' (#8388)
>
> Toggling is more intuitive for this dialog.
We could als
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Since we will ask people to update po-files after 1.1.5pre, it should
| at least have the right texts.
btw. could you change your change to read "Graphics" instead of
"Graphic"
Lgb
> "Mike" == <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mike> Infidels! :-) Actually, just remember that my version was to
Mike> stimulate action to do a better one. I certainly don't want to
Mike> edit it by hand every time there is a minor doc change. I
Mike> haven't had a chance to look at Amir's versio
> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Amir> Of course, one's work is never done. For example, why don't we
Amir> have fr_TOC.lyx?
Yes, why?
Amir> OTOH, french only has 3 doc files (what are you guys waiting for?)
I don't know, they may have a thesis to write.
Amir> Would y
On 13 Apr 2000, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Amir> Speaking of which, which version of the master TOC is going to
> Amir> be included in the 1.1.5 prerelease? Guess which one I'l
OK. I checked the new TOC.lyx in. Hopefully Mike won't get angry. But hey,
it's almost Friday anyway. I also checked in Doc_toc.pl, which is the
(slightly more than 5-line) script that creates TOC.lyx.
Lars, all you need to do is "Doc_toc.pl > TOC.lyx" before you move the
lyxdoc module into lyx-
>>>>> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Amir> Speaking of which, which version of the master TOC is going to
Amir> be included in the 1.1.5 prerelease? Guess which one I'll vote
Amir> for? :)
I took a look at both, and indeed yours
Guys
I noticed the new Master TOC in the 1.1.5cvs. I think it's an excellent
addition as it will certainly make finding what you want in the docs much
quicker.
Maybe this should be put at the very top of the drop down menu?
Also I noticed it doesn't cope well when the text in the
Sorry I'm not replying to the actual message, but that's more complicated to
do when you're reading messages via the digest.
Anyway, JMarc, the master TOC will on the contrary be very useful when you
haven't printed out the docs, because the section numbers are listed.
Fra
> "Mike" == <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mike> Oops. I didn't even think about looking at LaTeXConfig. Thanks
Mike> for your efforts in cleaning this up. This is why I write docs,
Mike> not code :-)
So, where is the LaTeXConfig entry? ;)
BTW, if you feel like rewriting (part of) LaTeXConfi
On 11 Apr 2000, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Mike> I've also attached a patch against 1.1.4fix2 which addresses
> Mike> some of the "trivial changes" I proposed last week.
>
> OK I've applied it. It would have been better to have (1) a "diff -ur"
> patch, because it's more readable and (2) a Cha
> "Mike" == <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mike> I've also attached a patch against 1.1.4fix2 which addresses
Mike> some of the "trivial changes" I proposed last week.
OK I've applied it. It would have been better to have (1) a "diff -ur"
patch, because it's more readable and (2) a ChangeLog
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2000, Garst R. Reese wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Now we just need to get LyX to support \dotfill in addition to \hfill.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Can't we just generalize that to fill with x.
> >
> >
On Fri, 7 Apr 2000, Garst R. Reese wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Now we just need to get LyX to support \dotfill in addition to \hfill.
> >
> > Mike
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Can't we just generalize that to fill with x.
>
>
>
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now we just need to get LyX to support \dotfill in addition to \hfill.
>
> Mike
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can't we just generalize that to fill with x.
Garst
On Fri, 7 Apr 2000, Amir Karger wrote:
> So, for your reading pleasure, I'm attaching doc_toc.pl and toc.lyx.
> doc_toc.pl is 107 lines. If I got rid of the comments and whitespace, I
> could shrink it, though to get it to five lines they would have to be really
> long lines :) I'm attaching it so
> I've commited a Master Table of Contents to the lyxdoc repository
> (TOC.lyx) along with the shell script that got me 98% of the way there.
> (As an exercize for Amir, rewrite it with 5 lines of Perl code ...). Let
> me know if you like it.
I don't really understand why you used that instead o
Greetings,
I've commited a Master Table of Contents to the lyxdoc repository
(TOC.lyx) along with the shell script that got me 98% of the way there.
(As an exercize for Amir, rewrite it with 5 lines of Perl code ...). Let
me know if you like it.
I've also attached a patch against 1.1.4fix2 which
29 matches
Mail list logo
