Le 22/11/2015 18:18, Richard Heck a écrit :
On 11/22/2015 07:29 AM, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 17/11/2015 21:36, Georg Baum a écrit :
Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 08/11/2015 16:16, Georg Baum a écrit :
If I understood Vincent correctly then it would not be a file format
change IMHO:
As I understood it, he referred to the suggestion that the "track
changes" button would be decoupled from \track_changes in the file:
\track_changes would set the state of the button on opening a
document,
but changing the change tracking status would not write back
anything to
the file.
What I understood as well, up to minor points (if \track_changes is set
to false, then we can fall back to the per-user, per-document setting,
because I haven't heard people on the list make a use case out of
forcing CT to be disabled on opening...).
This introduces some unsymmetry, but you are right, I don't know of a
use
case for forcing CT off either.
There
would be a separate lfun for setting the default in the file.
A minor technical question: there are no LFUN for document settings
usually right? You are suggesting a new LFUN for convenience?
There are not many, but some exist (e.g. textclass-apply). I do not
know why
there are so few lfuns for document settings, but to me it looks
natural to
have one.
In this case, the file syntax would be kept, but the meaning of
\track_changes would change a bit.
I made it a file format change because I imagined that we would have to
reset the state of the setting while converting, but good to know that
you are ready to obviate this step.
After thinking a bit about this
suggestion I believe it could be a good compromise for everybody,
and I
would not treat this as a file format change.
Either that, or add a git mode, in which case it would be good to add
the setting before 2.2, even if it does not encompass everything right
from the start. Either suit me; it's a matter of LyX's philosophy as
per
my other message.
I am not sure whether a git mode would be desirable. I believe that all
issues observed so far can also be a problem without VCS, so I think
solving
them on a case by case basis helps more users.
To be clearer, I did not literally mean a "git mode". Rather, a "do not
write user preferences to file" per-document setting similarly to
LibreOffice. I would rather avoid a catch-all option whose effect is
unclear to the user.
Ping me if you finally find a consensus on whether there is a
consensus :)
Actually I have no idea;-( I simply told my opinion.
The discussion seems to orient towards adding new per-document settings
to avoid writing user preferences to files. The questions is whether we
want one option for all preferences (a "do not write user preferences to
file" option as above), or just make the fields \tracking_changes, etc.,
independent from the current settings.
I have already voiced that either is fine by me. I would also like to
point out that one possibility requires a (trivial) file format change,
the other not. Therefore if we wait until after 2.2 release I imagine
that there is going to be more pressure towards the latter solution. It
is better if members of this list voice their opinion now if they prefer
the global per-document setting.
I'm not sure about this. Changes to preference file format do require a
format
change for the preference files, accounted for by the prefs2prefs
script. Like
layout2layout, it is forward only.
I am not sure we understood each other. It is only question of new
per-document settings, no new per-user setting. (Also I understand that
the per-user-per-document settings mentioned by Vincent use a different
mechanism if those are needed.)
