Re: about the initials module
Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2011-07-25, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > > > Independent of all your points, LyX should be designed for the average > > user. And he doesn't know the LaTeX internals. LyX was once invented to > > keep the LaTeX fiddling away from the users and this should be our aim > > also for the future. its actually very dependent on my points, since they define average user to have different profile. > I'd rather say the aim is to help the user using LaTeX, not to keep it away > from her/him. yes. pavel
Re: about the initials module
Am 25.07.2011 22:13, schrieb Guenter Milde:
My solution also required TeX Code and as Richard and Jürgen correctly
stated, we cannot avoid that because this would be a fileformat change.
I'm therefore opting to remove the module and reintroduce it for LyX
2.1 when InsetLayout supports arguments and we then can support
lettrine correctly and safely. Would that be OK for you?
Maybe a more prominent warning/documentation would help:
#DescriptionBegin
#Define character style for initials.
- #Hint: try to use math and its artistic font styles like Fractur or the
Calligraphic one.
+ #Warning: you need to insert }{ as ERT to use the initials style (see ).
+ #This modules uses the "lettrine" package, see its documentation for
+ #configuration details.
#DescriptionEnd
I'll ad this warning to the description but that would change strings in the po-files and we are in
string freeze.
Cases like this is why I'm opposed to hard string freezes. Better to have such a warning in English
in case it could not be translated before 2.0.1 than having no warning.
How about wrapper that uses an optional argument for the "to be typeset in
small-caps" part
Preamble
\newcommand{\lyxinitial}[2][]{\lettrine{#2}{#1}}
EndPreamble
and use this with the optional arg supported by lyx:
LatexName lyxinitial
OptionalArgs1
This doesn't help because InsetLayout does not support arguments. And for the Style definition as I
introduced it, you need 2 TeX Code braces.
regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
On 22. juli 2011 22:41, Uwe Stöhr wrote: [...] Yes, that is sadly true. There are too many distributions of Linux and Unix. I once tested out Fragalware and also Ubuntu and these two distros had a completely different package managing system and also its LaTeX implementation were different. I've been once sitting on a SuSE installation of a student and saw that its package handling is also different from the distros I tested. There are many linux distros - some are not meant for "dummies" to use. Those who are for "everyone", generally have a package management system. It is then up to the lyx package maintainer to take advantage of the distro's package management system. For debian (and probably ubuntu), you can install LyX with a simple command: apt-get install lyx (Or even select "lyx" in a fancy GUI package installation program!) And, thanks to package dependencies, this will also pull in texlive and various image converters if they don't already have them. If it isn't that easy, complain to the package manager. Beat me for this phrase or not, but the more I had to do with students using Linux I came to the conclusion that Linux will always be something for experts. All users I know are it with PCs but the majority in companies and even at universities are simple users who just want to use a certain program without being forced to look behind the scene because they have to concentrate on their real work. That is btw. also the reason the MiKTeX developer introduced the automatic package installation and without that LyX on Windows would not have been a success as it is now. Those who want to use linux, ought to get familiar with how software is installed on the distro they use. That, or they can turn to one of the companies who sell "linux support" to do the install for them. That way they won't "need to know", they'll have paid support just like windows users have. Nice to have, if linux is used for work. Helge Hafting
Re: about the initials module
On 2011-07-25, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Am 23.07.2011 18:01, schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> Independent of all your points, LyX should be designed for the average
> user. And he doesn't know the LaTeX internals. LyX was once invented to
> keep the LaTeX fiddling away from the users and this should be our aim
> also for the future.
I'd rather say the aim is to help the user using LaTeX, not to keep it away
from her/him.
> My solution also required TeX Code and as Richard and Jürgen correctly
> stated, we cannot avoid that because this would be a fileformat change.
> I'm therefore opting to remove the module and reintroduce it for LyX
> 2.1 when InsetLayout supports arguments and we then can support
> lettrine correctly and safely. Would that be OK for you?
Maybe a more prominent warning/documentation would help:
#DescriptionBegin
#Define character style for initials.
- #Hint: try to use math and its artistic font styles like Fractur or the
Calligraphic one.
+ #Warning: you need to insert }{ as ERT to use the initials style (see ).
+ #This modules uses the "lettrine" package, see its documentation for
+ #configuration details.
#DescriptionEnd
How about wrapper that uses an optional argument for the "to be typeset in
small-caps" part
Preamble
\newcommand{\lyxinitial}[2][]{\lettrine{#2}{#1}}
EndPreamble
and use this with the optional arg supported by lyx:
LatexName lyxinitial
OptionalArgs1
Or use a workaround with two styles like dinbrief, this way the second
argument can even be shown in small-caps on screen:
# dinbrief's \phone has 2 args, area and number. We define an empty
# command that can be set by the Area_Code style
Preamble
\newcommand{\areacode}{}
EndPreamble
# dinbrief's \phone has 2 args, area and number,
# define both as distinct styles
Style Area_Code
CopyStyle DinBrief
LabelString "Vorwahl:"
LatexName "renewcommand{\areacode}"
End
Style Telephone
CopyStyle DinBrief
LabelString "Telefon:"
LatexName phone
LatexParam {\areacode}
End
Re: about the initials module
Am 23.07.2011 18:01, schrieb Pavel Sanda: this is deeper and almost philosophical disputation about the open source model. until we want to turn this into software business i don't think your points hold. 1. the basic fact of "real life" is that lyx and this community exists. 2. it continues to exists because there are volunteers who contribute to it. 3. thus the fundamental measure of survival and success is not the number of +1 on facebook but number of contributor volunteers. (of course it correlates with the size of all the user base, but its not the *basics*). For me success is that people are using LyX because it is stable enough to face real-life documents. The number of volunteers doesn't necessarily correlate with the success and is in my opinion also not important for success. Take for example MiKTeX that only has one developer but many thousand if not even millions of users benefit from this program all over the world. or there is more business-like model. you are not interested of new incoming contributors, but for paying users; I'm not a fan of painting black or white. Of course I'm happy about every new contributor and I always tried my best in helping them. Independent of all your points, LyX should be designed for the average user. And he doesn't know the LaTeX internals. LyX was once invented to keep the LaTeX fiddling away from the users and this should be our aim also for the future. therefore fight against this way of working. We are all making bugs and every software has bugs but to introduce a bug purposely is something I cannot understand. you cannot understand because you misinterpret me. the choice was not between problematic and non-problematic support, but between problematic and no support. An analogon: You want to build a car for the poor people. The choice is in your opinion that they have a bad car or no car. Therefore you built it with 3 wheels instead of four. You can already do everything with TeX Code, so a new module must have a benefit. With your solution one still needs TeX Code to get no LaTeX errors so it is more safe if we don't have that module. Then LyX is not to blame if a document becomes uncompilable and the user who wants to use Initials will read the lettrine docs. My solution also required TeX Code and as Richard and Jürgen correctly stated, we cannot avoid that because this would be a fileformat change. I'm therefore opting to remove the module and reintroduce it for LyX 2.1 when InsetLayout supports arguments and we then can support lettrine correctly and safely. Would that be OK for you? i also don't see why you want to fight "against this way of working". two times appeared this module on the list, once with the question about parameters and if you raised your voice against it would be showstopper for me without any fight. If I would have seen it on the list I surely would have raised my voice but I missed it. I have a job and social life and therefore cannot follow the list all the time. i'm extremely touchy about another parts of the code and there is no single patch which goes without my attention there. what other workflow do you propose. My problem was the fact that you knew that \lettrine has 2 mandatory arguments but against your knowledge you cut of one. So yo were aware that it would cause LaTeX errors. The workflow of sending the patch to the list is of course the right one (and I haven't always done so in the past I know). or insert weird combination of insets into each other. Do you have an example? If so, we must fix it. all the examples given above happen to me during last half year, of course i dont them have at hand as lyx files. the bill from last two weeks which are clearly in my memory cache would something like: - insetspace around pictures and inside figure floats were ignored unless and special ERT was pushed (this is regular problem and i learned to automatically run preview whenever vertical insetspace is used, except normal text flow). Can you lease open a bug report? Can you give a recipe to reproduce the problem? I played now a bit but don't see a problem. - postscript and pdf output was different ->for proofreading of book wrt visible change tracking in output This is indeed a limitation. ->hyperlinks doesn't break in postscirpt, but fine in pdf This should be fixable. But I currently cannot built such a file. It never breaks for me, regardless of the output format of if I use the corresponding hypperref option or not, see attached. ->while checking lettrine examples you send postscript output was different with some parameters compared to pdf. I cannot reproduce this. Do you have an example? - pushing footnote-like inset in one of the environments of front page issued latex err I cannot reproduce this. Take for example our Tutorial where we have a footnote in the author field in the front page. The PostS
Re: MiKTeX on-the-fly installation defaults (was: 'Re: about the initials module')
Am 23.07.2011 10:49, schrieb Liviu Andronic: Initially I thought that I got confused, but it seems not. I've just played with LyX-2.0.0-3-Installer-Bundle.exe under wine and the default setting for MiKTeX on-the-fly installation is well 'Ask me first' (see attached shot). My vote is for switching the default to 'Yes'. My AltInstaller did this and the new merged one will also do this. However, even if we do this, there is one issue left: the user may still get scared of a blanket 'Yes' and against her own best interests would still choose 'Ask me first' or, worse, 'No'. In such cases a bold warning note below the setting would help. For the first installation it will be set to Yes so that all packages supported by LyX are installed. Afterwards you can change it any time to ask me first or no if you like. Note that users of the complete installer that includes MiKteX are mostly new users and they don't know anything about packages and often also nothing about LaTeX. They will learn that later in our tutorial. Users who already are using LyX have MiKTeX already installed and thus don't need this and/or know how to change the option in MiKTeX settings. regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Sometimes I'm really close to stop working for LyX. I'm frustrated that we
> don't focus on real life. Real life means for me that a student coming from
> school to the university has to write his first internship report. He will
> not know computer internals, knows perhaps a little Word, how to use
> Facebook and to write emails. LaTeX is complicated and you have to learn a
> lot to be able to use it. That is why Matthias Ettrich came to the
> conclusion that LaTeX will only be a success when it is as easy to handle
> like e.g. Word (he told me this at our last meeting) and therefore started
> LyX. That is also my opinion and that is why I work for LyX.
> Back to my example. The student decides to use LyX because a colleague told
> him about it and he is happy that he can write all the complicated equation
> and citations easily. Short before the deadline he thinks, that it would be
> fancy to use an initial for the acknowledgments. He is using your style but
> suddenly cannot compile the file - panic! What means "LaTeX error"? what is
> this cryptic error message is about? Damn, what nasty bug. The problem is
> now that he made a lot of other changes after inserting the initial and
> therefore don't come to the idea that the initial module is the reason of
> the bug. A nightmare for him and even if he is able to find the problem, he
> won't recommend LyX to his friends and they not to their friends, and so
> on.
this is deeper and almost philosophical disputation about the open source
model. until we want to turn this into software business i don't think your
points hold.
1. the basic fact of "real life" is that lyx and this community exists.
2. it continues to exists because there are volunteers who contribute to it.
3. thus the fundamental measure of survival and success is not the number of
+1 on facebook but number of contributor volunteers. (of course it correlates
with the size of all the user base, but its not the *basics*).
3. these volunteers do not come from people you describe in this and other
mail, ("knows perhaps little word, facebook, write email; knows
nothing about 'behind scenes', knows nothing about open source,
wants something which 'just work' and panics when problem arise")
4. instead they come from people who know more, are curious whats
behind the scenes and generally are technical problem-solvers.
5. paradoxically, bugs do stimulate group (4) and create new contributors.
6. if you annoy group 3, you can't make it software standard
but the project lives. if you annoy group 4, project is dead.
or there is more business-like model. you are not interested of new incoming
contributors, but for paying users; they pay your work and they have full right
to panic
when something goes wrong. and of course, why they should be interested whats
behind the scenes or even fixing something. if you annoy group 4 not much living
community around, but project can continue. if you annoy group 3 project is
dead.
of course the best is to please both 3 & 4, but thats sometimes difficult
since to build idiot-proof system means prohibit many things which enjoy
group 4 ;)
> therefore fight against this way of working. We are all making bugs and
> every software has bugs but to introduce a bug purposely is something I
> cannot understand.
you cannot understand because you misinterpret me.
the choice was not between problematic and non-problematic support, but
between problematic and no support. at that moment the probability and
seriousness of the problem looked to me low and even the sent counterexample
can be made compilable again by ERT after the charstyle.
i also don't see why you want to fight "against this way of working".
two times appeared this module on the list, once with the question about
parameters
and if you raised your voice against it would be showstopper for me without any
fight. if you are extremely touchy about latex troubles then do overview
latex-related
patches - i'll be happy, you know latex better than me.
i'm extremely touchy about another parts of the code and there is no single
patch which goes without my attention there. what other workflow do you propose.
now its in 2.0.0 and there is compatibility issue, but thats different story.
>>> We worked hard that this doesn't happen
>>> otherwise LyX would be quite useless for real life documents like a
>>> thesis
>>> or a business report. Where do you see that problems? If there is one it
>>> is
>>> a bug we need to fix.
>>
>> especially the starting pages of papers with wild combination of title,
>> date,
>> subtitile, authors, affiliation, abstract are rich source of latex errs.
>
> Can you please provide an example with the bug you are encountering.
>
>> uisng space inset is magic, ie. you can not trust that putting 1.mm space
>> in lyx document
>> will have this result in pdf output. you never know what happen unless you
>> latex it.
>
> If this would be
Re: MiKTeX on-the-fly installation and the windows installer (was: Re: about the initials module)
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Julien Rioux wrote: > Great observation. Just like you, it also frustrates me to have to click > yes/no a number of times, with several minutes inbetween each requests to > the user, as packages are being downloaded one-by-one. However, it would > frustrate me even more if my MiKTeX setting was changed from 'Ask' to 'Yes', > and packages I really don't want get installed behind my back. Being able to > change the MiKTeX 'Yes/No/Ask' setting from the installer would be fine with > me, but definitely no changing behind my back. > Is your concern related to having the 'Yes/No/Ask' setting always available at install time? In such case, I was _not_ proposing to remove the option and always use 'Yes' (as you say, "behind your back"). I merely suggested that the default be 'Yes' accompanied by a big, bold warning on the same screen that would inform the user of the advantages and drawbacks of the various options. Thus informed users, or knowledgeable ones such as yourself, will be able able to make the best choice for their needs. Regards Liviu > Additionally to your comment, let me say that in my opinion the LyX > installer should not rely on on-the-fly installation. Even with the > automatic download setting of MiKTeX set to 'Yes', the download and > installation still occurs package-by-package and is slow. Instead I picture > that the installer would offer a selectable list of packages, presented in a > single frame in the GUI. The user would make all their decisions at once on > this frame. Then a click of the Next button calls the MiKTeX package manager > directly using the command line interface of MiKTeX, mpm (the call is > something like mpm --admin --install-some=list.txt where list.txt is the > list of user selected packages). You can even query the MiKTeX installation > to find out whether these packages are already installed or not, and give > feedback in the GUI if they are. > > Regards, > Julien > > -- Do you know how to read? http://www.alienetworks.com/srtest.cfm http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/applications/xfce4-dict#speed-reader Do you know how to write? http://garbl.home.comcast.net/~garbl/stylemanual/e.htm#e-mail
MiKTeX on-the-fly installation defaults (was: 'Re: about the initials module')
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: >> This is true only in part. It doesn't hold if 'Install on-the-fly' is >> set to 'No', and it can backfire when set to 'Ask'. > > The LyX for Windows installer therefore sets it automatically to 'Install > on-the-fly'. > >> I have recently installed LyX with MiKTeX on several Windows systems >> the one big hurdle I have run into, using default settings and even >> though I'm a seasoned user of LyX, was MiKTeX's 'Ask' whether to >> install required packages on-the-fly. > > Even in case this dialog pops once, you can use the message not to show it > again and you will get the 'Install on-the-fly' feature. > Yes, but at this point the user might already be overwhelmingly confused. (It happened to me once.) >> First it's confusing: as a user, you don't really know why the LyX >> installer asks you all these scary questions > > I don't understand. The Windows installer sets the 'Install on-the-fly' > option for you so you should not get these MiKTeX dialog. It seems you found > an installer bug. > Initially I thought that I got confused, but it seems not. I've just played with LyX-2.0.0-3-Installer-Bundle.exe under wine and the default setting for MiKTeX on-the-fly installation is well 'Ask me first' (see attached shot). My vote is for switching the default to 'Yes'. However, even if we do this, there is one issue left: the user may still get scared of a blanket 'Yes' and against her own best interests would still choose 'Ask me first' or, worse, 'No'. In such cases a bold warning note below the setting would help. I'm thinking along these lines: "You are strongly advised to use the defaults for the 'Install missing packages' setting. This will allow for a quicker and complete LyX installation, and you can easily change this MiKTeX setting once you have run LyX for the first time. If you change it now for 'Ask me first' or 'No', you risk either significantly slowing down the installation process or ending up with an incomplete LyX installation." OK, the above is maybe too long, but some information on what these options mean in practice is highly desirable. Then, when someone decides to switch, she will know what she is doing. Regards Liviu <>
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 22:32, schrieb Pavel Sanda: yes, we are from different worlds. i read documentation exceptionaly and most of my know-how of software comes from playing with trial and error. thus the two hints inside the module are quite enough for user like me :) in the same vein i'm not way too much worried about possible latex errors. i have seen zilion of them while working with lyx and when they happen i just fix the problem. Sometimes I'm really close to stop working for LyX. I'm frustrated that we don't focus on real life. Real life means for me that a student coming from school to the university has to write his first internship report. He will not know computer internals, knows perhaps a little Word, how to use Facebook and to write emails. LaTeX is complicated and you have to learn a lot to be able to use it. That is why Matthias Ettrich came to the conclusion that LaTeX will only be a success when it is as easy to handle like e.g. Word (he told me this at our last meeting) and therefore started LyX. That is also my opinion and that is why I work for LyX. Back to my example. The student decides to use LyX because a colleague told him about it and he is happy that he can write all the complicated equation and citations easily. Short before the deadline he thinks, that it would be fancy to use an initial for the acknowledgments. He is using your style but suddenly cannot compile the file - panic! What means "LaTeX error"? what is this cryptic error message is about? Damn, what nasty bug. The problem is now that he made a lot of other changes after inserting the initial and therefore don't come to the idea that the initial module is the reason of the bug. A nightmare for him and even if he is able to find the problem, he won't recommend LyX to his friends and they not to their friends, and so on. (I spent countless discussions where I tried to convince people to give LyX a try, but they had heard from a friend of a friend, that it doesn't work and therefore didn't even try it out.) So if we are not willing to produce working LaTeX code, we can quit LyX! You have had a look at the lettrine manual when you implemented the module. So you have seen that \lettrine requires two arguments but cut of one. As an experienced user you also know that incorrect LaTeX code can destroy a whole document. The fact that you did this purposely made me angry. My personal goal is to help that average computer users will and are able to use LyX and that it will be more comfortable than e.g. Word and will therefore fight against this way of working. We are all making bugs and every software has bugs but to introduce a bug purposely is something I cannot understand. My style needs TeX Code but as explained I had to use this to overcome your error prone solution. Moreover, when a user wants to use the Initials module, he will now see in the description, where to find a documentation how it works. This minimizes that people use it without reading the doc about it. As soon as InsetLayout supports arguments, we can go away from my solution and implement a final solution that works without any TeX Code. But using the module without having a look at the example in the manual will never work. But this is not a problem as this applies for many things like theorems or beamer. thats why i'm not jumping for joy about the style solution. its just nicer ERT and there is no way how to use it except of reading some additional docs. But the most important thing is that it works! Our aim should be to provide features that do work in all cases and don't interfere with other ones, or even lead to LaTeX errors. its nice to read this just mail after you calmly throw to the dustbin warnings about latex issues (ie missing packages) in the manuals. because we can't care about all cases. Please don't mix this up. The package installation is something outside LyX. We worked hard that this doesn't happen otherwise LyX would be quite useless for real life documents like a thesis or a business report. Where do you see that problems? If there is one it is a bug we need to fix. especially the starting pages of papers with wild combination of title, date, subtitile, authors, affiliation, abstract are rich source of latex errs. Can you please provide an example with the bug you are encountering. uisng space inset is magic, ie. you can not trust that putting 1.mm space in lyx document will have this result in pdf output. you never know what happen unless you latex it. If this would be the case, LyX would be unusable. Of course you get 1 mm space when you insert it or do you have an example where this is not the case? or mixing different latex packages. Not when using the packages supported by LyX. For TeX Code it is of course your turn as it is then your decision that you want to use it purposely this way. or using different output routes like postscript vs pdf. PDF is a subset of PostScri
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 20:25, schrieb Pavel Sanda: what is written in the paragraphs around above shows that you have little idea how things are done except of the windows pond. texlive creature is way too big to be installed and splitting it into parts where advanced parts are installed on administrator request only (not necessarily under user control). this is done on important linux archs, i'm not picking some skeleton from the closet. I personally was able to run TeXLive from an USB stick on an Ubuntu of a colleague. This was an emergency action to fulfill his thesis deadline. And it astonishingly worked. We could compile his LyX files without any further package fiddling. This was about 3 years ago and I doubt that this should not be possible with TeXLive 2011. although automatic updates might be possible with upcoming texlive installs it wouldn't be prefered way of packaging except of windows. so your usage of 'all platforms' seems to be synonym to 'distribution workflow on windows' I was referring to TeXLive and you can use this on all platforms directly from an USB stick. and translation of 'It is impossible to take care about every OS' should be read as 'it is impossible to take care about anything except of windows OS'. Yes, that is sadly true. There are too many distributions of Linux and Unix. I once tested out Fragalware and also Ubuntu and these two distros had a completely different package managing system and also its LaTeX implementation were different. I've been once sitting on a SuSE installation of a student and saw that its package handling is also different from the distros I tested. Beat me for this phrase or not, but the more I had to do with students using Linux I came to the conclusion that Linux will always be something for experts. All users I know are it with PCs but the majority in companies and even at universities are simple users who just want to use a certain program without being forced to look behind the scene because they have to concentrate on their real work. That is btw. also the reason the MiKTeX developer introduced the automatic package installation and without that LyX on Windows would not have been a success as it is now. regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Uwe Stöhr wrote: >> moreover there is no intuitive way how to typeset big initial without >> reading manual where special construct needs to be learned. >> the charstyle path is not clean, but for the basic usage works without any >> need >> to read manual pages. > > What do you expect? No style is self-explanatory. Of course one needs to > read first how it works. yes, we are from different worlds. i read documentation exceptionaly and most of my know-how of software comes from playing with trial and error. thus the two hints inside the module are quite enough for user like me :) in the same vein i'm not way too much worried about possible latex errors. i have seen zilion of them while working with lyx and when they happen i just fix the problem. thats why i'm not jumping for joy about the style solution. its just nicer ERT and there is no way how to use it except of reading some additional docs. as admitted the charstyle is somewhat hackish and poor support because i dont see way how to solve it correctly with our machinery. it works by chance but it works. the latex problems is solvable by ERT similarly as you are doing in the style solution. if somebody is unable to solve latex issues he will encounter troubles with your solution as well - so there is not much difference. > Our aim should be to > provide features that do work in all cases and don't interfere with other > ones, or even lead to LaTeX errors. its nice to read this just mail after you calmly throw to the dustbin warnings about latex issues (ie missing packages) in the manuals. because we can't care about all cases. >> you are probably right that when you use combinations of >> lettrine with weird stuff around, weird things can happen. like with many >> other >> insets in lyx. > > Sorry, but I cannot agree to this. We worked hard that this doesn't happen > otherwise LyX would be quite useless for real life documents like a thesis > or a business report. Where do you see that problems? If there is one it is > a bug we need to fix. especially the starting pages of papers with wild combination of title, date, subtitile, authors, affiliation, abstract are rich source of latex errs. using space inset is magic, ie. you can not trust that putting 1.mm space in lyx document will have this result in pdf output. you never know what happen unless you latex it. or mixing different latex packages. or using different output routes like postscript vs pdf. or insert weird combination of insets into each other. or using something different than windows when you want to typeset our manuals :)) >>> For compatibility reasons I left your style definition >> >> first of all - as far as compatibility reasons is concerned - your last >> changes >> will cause lyx 2.0.0 not being able to compile some 2.0.x>0 files due to >> missing style > > You mean because I added a style? Yes, LyX 2.0.0 will tell you that a style > is unknown when loading a file made with LyX 2.0.1 that usess my new style. > But this cannot be avoided. Take for example the various layout files we > need to update from time to time when there are new versions. Especially > for example the scientific paper classes we have to add new styles or > rename some LaTeX commands all the time. > >>> but I think we should remove it. >> >> in branch? then some files produced by lyx 2.0.x>1 wont be compilable with >> lyx 2.0.0. > > As I said, better we get rid of the buggy code right now than to wait > longer. Currently the probability that people use the feature is relatively > low because there was no documentation and LyX 2.0.0 is still quites new > (many users I know wait for the 0.1 release before they switch from 1.6 to > 2.0). And we cannot wait until LyX 2.1 because this might be a year and it > is in my opinion not acceptable to provide a style that could lead to LaTeX > errors. *shrug* this is call for Richard. to summary my pov for better review: - i admit that charstyle solution is poor, because it allows only special case of initials. - moreover in specific combination it can lead to latex erros unless you use specific ERT to fix it. - seeing the debate now i admit that its questionable whether it should have been added to lyx at all and let the enh request wontfix instead. however some of these points have been raised months ago and nobody else was against. its my lesson to be more conservative about putting new modules to the tree. - the new added style solution makes it possible to use lettrine package to its depth. its enhacenment to the current state of things. - both solutions can lead to latex errors by missing some ERT, both can be fixed (at least the charstyle counterexample posted). for branch: - new style can be added, lyx 2.0.0 won't process 2.0.1 files. i dont remember what was the previous policies about adding stuff. - i dont see latex the problems described as something detrimental, the more that the second solution calls for the
Re: about the initials module
Uwe Stöhr wrote: > It is impossible to take care about every OS. For MiKTeX, MacTeX/TeXLive > there is no problem and TeXLive works on all platforms. > > In your Linux distro, the package might be tricky to install in another > distro it is not tricky. What is a common package in your distro might be a > non- standard package in another distro. There are too many distros > available and LyX doesn't need to take care about the spacial packaging of > your OS. But it needs to describe its features. > > In general installing a LateX package is not difficult and LateX tells you > which package it misses. On many platforms it even works automatically as > long as you have an Internet connection. On Windows all module packages are > even installed automatically together with LyX when LyX is started the > first time. This will hopefully also be the case in TeXLive 2011. what is written in the paragraphs around above shows that you have little idea how things are done except of the windows pond. texlive creature is way too big to be installed and splitting it into parts where advanced parts are installed on administrator request only (not necessarily under user control). this is done on important linux archs, i'm not picking some skeleton from the closet. although automatic updates might be possible with upcoming texlive installs it wouldn't be prefered way of packaging except of windows. so your usage of 'all platforms' seems to be synonym to 'distribution workflow on windows' and translation of 'It is impossible to take care about every OS' should be read as 'it is impossible to take care about anything except of windows OS'. pavel
Re: about the initials module
On 20/07/2011 1:35 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: Am 20.07.2011 18:55, schrieb Liviu Andronic: On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: But also with MiKTeX you only need Internet access when installing LyX. Then you already have all packages installed that are supported by LyX and its modules and can work offline for the future. This is true only in part. It doesn't hold if 'Install on-the-fly' is set to 'No', and it can backfire when set to 'Ask'. The LyX for Windows installer therefore sets it automatically to 'Install on-the-fly'. I have recently installed LyX with MiKTeX on several Windows systems the one big hurdle I have run into, using default settings and even though I'm a seasoned user of LyX, was MiKTeX's 'Ask' whether to install required packages on-the-fly. Even in case this dialog pops once, you can use the message not to show it again and you will get the 'Install on-the-fly' feature. First it's confusing: as a user, you don't really know why the LyX installer asks you all these scary questions I don't understand. The Windows installer sets the 'Install on-the-fly' option for you so you should not get these MiKTeX dialog. It seems you found an installer bug. I think in the 1.6 series, your alt installer did this, but the official installer did not. This has personally kept me away from your alt installer. regards Uwe Regards, Julien
MiKTeX on-the-fly installation and the windows installer (was: Re: about the initials module)
On 20/07/2011 12:55 PM, Liviu Andronic wrote: On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: But also with MiKTeX you only need Internet access when installing LyX. Then you already have all packages installed that are supported by LyX and its modules and can work offline for the future. This is true only in part. It doesn't hold if 'Install on-the-fly' is set to 'No', and it can backfire when set to 'Ask'. I have recently installed LyX with MiKTeX on several Windows systems the one big hurdle I have run into, using default settings and even though I'm a seasoned user of LyX, was MiKTeX's 'Ask' whether to install required packages on-the-fly. First it's confusing: as a user, you don't really know why the LyX installer asks you all these scary questions with funny names, and why it keeps asking the same question all over again. (A long time ago when I was first confronted with the Windows LyX installer, all the 'Install this required package?' questions got me to abort the installation several times.) Second, it's so very slow and requires too much intervention from the user. (After the 6th-7th such question I usually don't care any more and switch it to 'Yes, always install on-the-fly'.) In all, I would say that 'Ask' is an impractical default for the LyX installation. 'No' is unacceptable, because you get a LyX installation where the chances are high that documents won't compile for no apparent reason. (Only yesterday a friend of mine complained that it took him a lot of work and internet searches just to get a basic document compile with LyX and MiKTeX. It seemed to be an issue of missing packages.) Thus, would the maintainers of the installer consider using 'Yes' as a default for the MiKTeX on-the-fly installation of packages? Regards Liviu Great observation. Just like you, it also frustrates me to have to click yes/no a number of times, with several minutes inbetween each requests to the user, as packages are being downloaded one-by-one. However, it would frustrate me even more if my MiKTeX setting was changed from 'Ask' to 'Yes', and packages I really don't want get installed behind my back. Being able to change the MiKTeX 'Yes/No/Ask' setting from the installer would be fine with me, but definitely no changing behind my back. Additionally to your comment, let me say that in my opinion the LyX installer should not rely on on-the-fly installation. Even with the automatic download setting of MiKTeX set to 'Yes', the download and installation still occurs package-by-package and is slow. Instead I picture that the installer would offer a selectable list of packages, presented in a single frame in the GUI. The user would make all their decisions at once on this frame. Then a click of the Next button calls the MiKTeX package manager directly using the command line interface of MiKTeX, mpm (the call is something like mpm --admin --install-some=list.txt where list.txt is the list of user selected packages). You can even query the MiKTeX installation to find out whether these packages are already installed or not, and give feedback in the GUI if they are. Regards, Julien
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 18:55, schrieb Liviu Andronic: On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: But also with MiKTeX you only need Internet access when installing LyX. Then you already have all packages installed that are supported by LyX and its modules and can work offline for the future. This is true only in part. It doesn't hold if 'Install on-the-fly' is set to 'No', and it can backfire when set to 'Ask'. The LyX for Windows installer therefore sets it automatically to 'Install on-the-fly'. I have recently installed LyX with MiKTeX on several Windows systems the one big hurdle I have run into, using default settings and even though I'm a seasoned user of LyX, was MiKTeX's 'Ask' whether to install required packages on-the-fly. Even in case this dialog pops once, you can use the message not to show it again and you will get the 'Install on-the-fly' feature. First it's confusing: as a user, you don't really know why the LyX installer asks you all these scary questions I don't understand. The Windows installer sets the 'Install on-the-fly' option for you so you should not get these MiKTeX dialog. It seems you found an installer bug. regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > But also with MiKTeX you only need Internet access when installing LyX. Then > you already have all packages installed that are supported by LyX and its > modules and can work offline for the future. > This is true only in part. It doesn't hold if 'Install on-the-fly' is set to 'No', and it can backfire when set to 'Ask'. I have recently installed LyX with MiKTeX on several Windows systems the one big hurdle I have run into, using default settings and even though I'm a seasoned user of LyX, was MiKTeX's 'Ask' whether to install required packages on-the-fly. First it's confusing: as a user, you don't really know why the LyX installer asks you all these scary questions with funny names, and why it keeps asking the same question all over again. (A long time ago when I was first confronted with the Windows LyX installer, all the 'Install this required package?' questions got me to abort the installation several times.) Second, it's so very slow and requires too much intervention from the user. (After the 6th-7th such question I usually don't care any more and switch it to 'Yes, always install on-the-fly'.) In all, I would say that 'Ask' is an impractical default for the LyX installation. 'No' is unacceptable, because you get a LyX installation where the chances are high that documents won't compile for no apparent reason. (Only yesterday a friend of mine complained that it took him a lot of work and internet searches just to get a basic document compile with LyX and MiKTeX. It seemed to be an issue of missing packages.) Thus, would the maintainers of the installer consider using 'Yes' as a default for the MiKTeX on-the-fly installation of packages? Regards Liviu
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 12:08, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: This is funny when we see the code we had to add to adapt to miktex quirks (like checking for packages in configure.py just to let miktex install them). (MiKTeX is just one of the various LaTeX distros but one of the most used one as it is more or less the standard on Windows.) But installing a package is really easy with TeXLive thanks to its package manager and TeXLive is the reference distro of the LateX community and is available on all platforms and can even be used as Live distribution without installing it. However, I try to keep the exotic package away from the UserGuide. But the EmbeddedObjecs manual that contains now the Initials documentation was from its beginning designed to explain more special features and therefore uses since ever some non-standard packages like e.g. arydshln and the like. The first note in the manual lists the packages. For the UserGuide I added a section about special lists features that requires enumitem. This package might not be standard but is in my opinion in the same level as e.g. wrapfig that is already required since a long time. The advantage is that we for the first time can show the users solutions for problems that appear very frequently on the users list. In my experience the question how to resume a list is one of most often asked questions in the list. While I'm at it, many thanks Günter for the enumitem module! We are leaning to having lyx work well only when connected to internet just because miktex forces us to do it, and this is a terrible user interface IMO. There is still the possibility to install/use TeXLive with all packages on CTAN. Then no Internet connection is necessary, except for the first time where you download TeXLive. But also with MiKTeX you only need Internet access when installing LyX. Then you already have all packages installed that are supported by LyX and its modules and can work offline for the future. But this is the same as for many other programs. Take for example MSVC or Adobe Reader. For these you also need Internet connection to install the programs. But in general on all platforms you always have to have at least once Internet connection. Also for LyX on Linux and Mac you need an Internet connection to download LyX or install its package. So the statement "lyx work well only when connected to internet" is not correct. If this would be correct then you are right that this is not acceptable. regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Le 20/07/2011 06:26, Uwe Stöhr a écrit : Am 20.07.2011 03:45, schrieb Pavel Sanda: on many linux distros latex is divided on the basic packages and extra sets for advanced usage only - not installed by default and without any automatical setup on request like miktex on windows do. It is impossible to take care about every OS. For MiKTeX, MacTeX/TeXLive there is no problem and TeXLive works on all platforms. In general installing a LateX package is not difficult and LateX tells you which package it misses. On many platforms it even works automatically as long as you have an Internet connection. On Windows all module packages are even installed automatically together with LyX when LyX is started the first time. This will hopefully also be the case in TeXLive 2011. This is funny when we see the code we had to add to adapt to miktex quirks (like checking for packages in configure.py just to let miktex install them). We are leaning to having lyx work well only when connected to internet just because miktex forces us to do it, and this is a terrible user interface IMO. miktex also is just another distro. JMarc
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 06:06, schrieb Uwe Stöhr: Attached is an example where you get a LaTeX error. Here it is. regards Uwe newfile1.lyx Description: application/lyx
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 03:45, schrieb Pavel Sanda: Uwe Stöhr wrote: Our manuals have to describe what you can do with LyX. There is no other way. It might always be possible that our docs are uncompilable. We cannot control what LaTeX-packages are installed on a system. Or where do you want to set the line? i dont have any fixed rule but there are latex packages which are basic and those which are more advanced. seeing your last additions my bell starts ringing that the border line was crossed. on many linux distros latex is divided on the basic packages and extra sets for advanced usage only - not installed by default and without any automatical setup on request like miktex on windows do. It is impossible to take care about every OS. For MiKTeX, MacTeX/TeXLive there is no problem and TeXLive works on all platforms. In your Linux distro, the package might be tricky to install in another distro it is not tricky. What is a common package in your distro might be a non- standard package in another distro. There are too many distros available and LyX doesn't need to take care about the spacial packaging of your OS. But it needs to describe its features. In general installing a LateX package is not difficult and LateX tells you which package it misses. On many platforms it even works automatically as long as you have an Internet connection. On Windows all module packages are even installed automatically together with LyX when LyX is started the first time. This will hopefully also be the case in TeXLive 2011. and example file looks like better place. I'm trying not to have a file for every feature. This would increase the maintaining a lot and users won't find it. For example I recently found the enumitem example file by chance because I do not look into all our currently 50 example files. An average user would also not know from the meaningless name "enumitem" what this might be about and that this provides list features. But within the UserGuide he can look for lists and read that for some special features he can load a module named enumitem and sees it in the context of a well indexed document describing other list features and thus is suitable to print it if one likes. As average user of other programs I open its UserGuide and expect to find everything. (This works for most of the programs I'm using.) For the special things like initials we have the EmbeddedObjects and the Additional manual which are referenced at the beginning of the corresponding sections in the UserGuide. These manuals also clearly state at the beginning what packages are needed to see all their sections in the output. For those who are e.g. offline and therefore cannot install any LaTeX package, I provide PDF versions of the manual in the Wiki (the link given at the beginning of the documentation files). regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 03:32, schrieb Pavel Sanda: I now wrote its documentation from scratch and saw that your module did not work. it depends what you mean by "works". if you just insert charstyle push character there and start writing after charstyle inset it 'just works' (at least here). By chance. As I said, you forgot the mandatory argument. So if the user e.g. uses a formatting in the paragraph, you will get troubles. LaTeX is looking for the missing brace pair for the argument and tries to take the next one it finds. But this can be a brace pair of another LaTeX command. Attached is an example where you get a LaTeX error. It is very important that the LaTeX code that is produced by LyX is correct, otherwise you will have side effects that could harm to the maximum. you get big two lines initial character and paragraph of text around it. unfortunately it is fixed for this usage and most of lettrine advanced features are unused since we don have machinery how to push more arguments there (at least i'm not aware of it). We already have the feature to add as many arguments as you like, mandatory and optional ones. for more advanced usage you need to go for ERT. i looked at the new style and its not solving things completely - you still need various ERTs or opt insets. The argument insets are intended - that is our current UI to handle arguments. Today we discussed how to improve this UI. The two TeX code braces are only necessary because LyX does for an unknown reason not support arguments in InsetLayout. (Must have been forgotten when InsetLayout was implemented, but Richard is now aware if that.) When LyX has this feature, they can go. However, the two TeX code braces are acceptable, because previously one had to do everything as TeX code and thus needed to know the names of the commands. moreover there is no intuitive way how to typeset big initial without reading manual where special construct needs to be learned. the charstyle path is not clean, but for the basic usage works without any need to read manual pages. What do you expect? No style is self-explanatory. Of course one needs to read first how it works. I don't like the attitude to accept a lower quality just because it doesn't need to be documented. Our aim should be to provide features that do work in all cases and don't interfere with other ones, or even lead to LaTeX errors. In general I don't understand your intention. What was the benefit of your module? It was designed to work only for one special case and only worked by chance. As a user I will surely sooner or later have the case were the predefined layout is not suitable for me (I for example need an inital over 3 lines. Then I had to use TeX code and to do this, I had to read the lettrine manual and learn LaTeX. So in the end I had to read and learn much more than with the current version. you are probably right that when you use combinations of lettrine with weird stuff around, weird things can happen. like with many other insets in lyx. Sorry, but I cannot agree to this. We worked hard that this doesn't happen otherwise LyX would be quite useless for real life documents like a thesis or a business report. Where do you see that problems? If there is one it is a bug we need to fix. For compatibility reasons I left your style definition first of all - as far as compatibility reasons is concerned - your last changes will cause lyx 2.0.0 not being able to compile some 2.0.x>0 files due to missing style You mean because I added a style? Yes, LyX 2.0.0 will tell you that a style is unknown when loading a file made with LyX 2.0.1 that usess my new style. But this cannot be avoided. Take for example the various layout files we need to update from time to time when there are new versions. Especially for example the scientific paper classes we have to add new styles or rename some LaTeX commands all the time. but I think we should remove it. in branch? then some files produced by lyx 2.0.x>1 wont be compilable with lyx 2.0.0. As I said, better we get rid of the buggy code right now than to wait longer. Currently the probability that people use the feature is relatively low because there was no documentation and LyX 2.0.0 is still quites new (many users I know wait for the 0.1 release before they switch from 1.6 to 2.0). And we cannot wait until LyX 2.1 because this might be a year and it is in my opinion not acceptable to provide a style that could lead to LaTeX errors. regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Our manuals have to describe what you can do with LyX. There is no other > way. It might always be possible that our docs are uncompilable. We cannot > control what LaTeX-packages are installed on a system. Or where do you want > to set the line? i dont have any fixed rule but there are latex packages which are basic and those which are more advanced. seeing your last additions my bell starts ringing that the border line was crossed. on many linux distros latex is divided on the basic packages and extra sets for advanced usage only - not installed by default and without any automatical setup on request like miktex on windows do. for example by simply checking $ texmfind lettrine.sty dev-texlive/texlive-latexextra [1 file] lettrine.sty Found 1 texmf file in 1 ebuild. one sees that extra set of latex packages is needed on my distro. it sounds wrong that building basic lyx manuals should require this and example file looks like better place. pavel
Re: about the initials module
... so i returned to this ... Uwe Stöhr wrote: > I now wrote its documentation from scratch and saw that your module did not > work. it depends what you mean by "works". if you just insert charstyle push character there and start writing after charstyle inset it 'just works' (at least here). you get big two lines initial character and paragraph of text around it. unfortunately it is fixed for this usage and most of lettrine advanced features are unused since we don have machinery how to push more arguments there (at least i'm not aware of it). thats nothing strikingly new and we have already thread with Hartmut exactly about this some time ago here on devel list. for more advanced usage you need to go for ERT. i looked at the new style and its not solving things completely - you still need various ERTs or opt insets. moreover there is no intuitive way how to typeset big initial without reading manual where special construct needs to be learned. the charstyle path is not clean, but for the basic usage works without any need to read manual pages. you are probably right that when you use combinations of lettrine with weird stuff around, weird things can happen. like with many other insets in lyx. > For compatibility reasons I left your style definition first of all - as far as compatibility reasons is concerned - your last changes will cause lyx 2.0.0 not being able to compile some 2.0.x>0 files due to missing style its not fileformat issue though and i don't remember whether we used to make such changes in 1.6.x. >but I think we should remove it. in branch? then some files produced by lyx 2.0.x>1 wont be compilable with lyx 2.0.0. >It is not usable and users who use it, would get LaTeX > troubles. We should also add a note in the release notes that people should > switch to the initials style. What do you think? i'm not convinced yet. but that can change if you show me some realistic example how the lettrine charstyle is unusable. for the few random examples i tried myself it worked as it should. pavel
Re: about the initials module
Am 20.07.2011 00:02, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: Of course don't forget to doublecheck that it works (it is in 2.0 too). I always compile every file as PDF before committing. This should btw. the default procedure. (The only exception are the Japanese files because I don't have ptex.) regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Le 19/07/11 19:57, Uwe Stöhr a écrit : PS: BTW Uwe, did you see my messages about the \LyX macro? Since r37164 it is robust under hyperref and it is not necessary to redefine it in preamble. Not yes. Thanks for the hint, I'll remove the corresponding preamble code now. Of course don't forget to doublecheck that it works (it is in 2.0 too). JMarc
Re: about the initials module
Am 19.07.2011 12:11, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: PS: BTW Uwe, did you see my messages about the \LyX macro? Since r37164 it is robust under hyperref and it is not necessary to redefine it in preamble. Not yes. Thanks for the hint, I'll remove the corresponding preamble code now. regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Am 19.07.2011 11:55, schrieb Pavel Sanda: in the page http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 there was the icon that the initial module is documented. Where is it, I cannot find it? i put the tickmark of documented feature when the module description inside settings dialog is enough to grab all information needed. Sorry, but "Define character style for initials. Hint: try to use math and its artistic font styles like Fractur or the Calligraphic one." is no documentation. With this info the module is useless. Where should I use what, insert what? Where comes the math, what has math to do with an initial? And what about the arguments one needs for initials? as sidecomment i dont think that adding specific features which pull extra packages into our manuals is a healthy thing. they are not compilable on various situations then and produce strange errors like when we added mchem notion into math manual and instant preview stop to work or even compile for some users. Our manuals have to describe what you can do with LyX. There is no other way. It might always be possible that our docs are uncompilable. We cannot control what LaTeX-packages are installed on a system. Or where do you want to set the line? For example wrapfig might not be installed, should we therefore not document wrapped floats? booktabs might not be installed should we therefore not document all our table features so that the user might ask his self "What is this booktabs option in the table dialog about, I cannot find it in the docs?". In general the basic rule applies: "An undocumented feature is an unused feature." So we have to document it somewhere. I use the EmbeddedObjects manual to document the more trickery package support and some tips and tricks. If a package is really exotic or interferes potentially with others, I put it into an extra file. In case of packages that seem to be not widely used and might probably not be installed, I added notes to the docs which package is needed for what sections. For some features I even use a construct that you get a special section content if the package is not available. So the document is still compilable. regards Uwe
Re: about the initials module
Le 19/07/2011 11:55, Pavel Sanda a écrit : as sidecomment i dont think that adding specific features which pull extra packages into our manuals is a healthy thing. they are not compilable on various situations then and produce strange errors like when we added mchem notion into math manual and instant preview stop to work or even compile for some users. Indeed. JMarc PS: BTW Uwe, did you see my messages about the \LyX macro? Since r37164 it is robust under hyperref and it is not necessary to redefine it in preamble.
Re: about the initials module
Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Hi Pavel, > > in the page http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX20 there was the icon that the > initial module is documented. Where is it, I cannot find it? i put the tickmark of documented feature when the module description inside settings dialog is enough to grab all information needed. as sidecomment i dont think that adding specific features which pull extra packages into our manuals is a healthy thing. they are not compilable on various situations then and produce strange errors like when we added mchem notion into math manual and instant preview stop to work or even compile for some users. i will review your current changes soon. pavel
