Re: 2.1 release status

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Uwe Stöhr uwesto...@web.de wrote: Am 18.03.2014 08:53, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: LyX 2.1 is far past its due data, so, yes, I want to release as soon as possible. OK. The installer is ready as I said. I can ship an older version of ImageMagick

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 17.03.2014 23:46, schrieb Uwe Stöhr: @ everybody: Can you please review http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX21 if all new features are listed so that I know what to document. These are not blocking issues, but thanks for reminding people. I of course know that this is no blocker but why does

Re: 2.1 release status

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 18.03.2014 08:53, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: > > >> LyX 2.1 is far past its due data, so, yes, I want to release as soon >> as possible. > > > OK. The installer is ready as I said. I can ship an older version of >

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 17.03.2014 23:46, schrieb Uwe Stöhr: @ everybody: Can you please review http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX21 if all new features are listed so that I know what to document. These are not blocking issues, but thanks for reminding people. I of course know that this is no blocker but why does

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 18.03.2014 09:02, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: See its changelog in master - I completely changed the handling of Perl, its interaction with MikTeX and fixed some bugs. I can also not test all the different languages (dictionaries and thesaurus) due to lack of time. Btw. to where can I

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 18.03.2014 08:53, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: LyX 2.1 is far past its due data, so, yes, I want to release as soon as possible. OK. The installer is ready as I said. I can ship an older version of ImageMagick without the bug and hope I get a fixed verson before the final release.

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 18.03.2014 09:02, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: See its changelog in master - I completely changed the handling of Perl, its interaction with MikTeX and fixed some bugs. I can also not test all the different languages (dictionaries and thesaurus) due to lack of time. Btw. to where can I

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 18.03.2014 08:53, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: LyX 2.1 is far past its due data, so, yes, I want to release as soon as possible. OK. The installer is ready as I said. I can ship an older version of ImageMagick without the bug and hope I get a fixed verson before the final release.

Re: 2.1 release status

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Uwe Stöhr uwesto...@web.de wrote: Am 13.03.2014 09:08, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: - the last few Imagemagick have a bug in the handling of PDF files and I don't want to release an older IM version because of security bugs they fixed (I already contacted

Re: 2.1 release status

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Uwe Stöhr uwesto...@web.de wrote: Am 13.03.2014 09:18, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: ... which means that in the ideal future, if you want a new feature accepted into LyX, you should provide documentation about it and have it well tested I am a bit

Re: 2.1 release status

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn v...@lyx.org wrote: On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Uwe Stöhr uwesto...@web.de wrote: Am 13.03.2014 09:08, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: - the last few Imagemagick have a bug in the handling of PDF files and I don't want to release

Re: 2.1 release status

Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:43:36PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the cmd prefix, you will inevitably get a command window.

Re: 2.1 release status

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 09:16:29PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:43:36PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function

Re: 2.1 release status

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 13.03.2014 09:08, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: > > - the last few Imagemagick have a bug in the handling of PDF files and I don't want to release an older IM version because of security bugs they fixed (I

Re: 2.1 release status

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 13.03.2014 09:18, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: > > >> ... which means that in the ideal future, if you want a new feature >> accepted into LyX, you should provide documentation about it and have >> it well tested > >

Re: 2.1 release status

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: >> Am 13.03.2014 09:08, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: >> >> > - the last few Imagemagick have a bug in the handling of PDF files and I >

Re: 2.1 release status

Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:43:36PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > >> Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> >> > I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of >> > QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the "cmd" >> > prefix, you will inevitably get a

Re: 2.1 release status

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 09:16:29PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:43:36PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > > > >> Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > >> > >> > I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of > >> > QProcess::startDetached. If you

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 09:08, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: - the last few Imagemagick have a bug in the handling of PDF files and I don't want to release an older IM version because of security bugs they fixed (I already contacted the IM developers). What is the bug ? PDFs with a bounding or

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 09:11, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: The bug is only in LyX 2.1git and yes, it is super annoying. I created now a bug: http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/9035 I agree it is super annoying, but at the same time I agree with Georg: the issue didn't really make it to lyx-devel or

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 09:18, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: ... which means that in the ideal future, if you want a new feature accepted into LyX, you should provide documentation about it and have it well tested I am a bit annoyed about this. I only want a working release. I develop LyX for 10

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 09:08, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: - the last few Imagemagick have a bug in the handling of PDF files and I don't want to release an older IM version because of security bugs they fixed (I already contacted the IM developers). What is the bug ? PDFs with a bounding or

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 09:11, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: The bug is only in LyX 2.1git and yes, it is super annoying. I created now a bug: http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/9035 I agree it is super annoying, but at the same time I agree with Georg: the issue didn't really make it to lyx-devel or

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 09:18, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: ... which means that in the ideal future, if you want a new feature accepted into LyX, you should provide documentation about it and have it well tested I am a bit annoyed about this. I only want a working release. I develop LyX for 10

Re: 2.1 release status

On 13 Mar 2014 at 21:48:16 , Georg Baum (georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de) wrote: Benjamin Piwowarski wrote:  I have another question (this was what I was trying to fix also):  - why the python2() code in os.cpp (line 41) does not prevent the wrong  python to be selected.  I think this is the

Re: 2.1 release status

On 13 Mar 2014 at 21:48:16 , Georg Baum (georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de) wrote: Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: I have another question (this was what I was trying to fix also): - why the python2() code in os.cpp (line 41) does not prevent the wrong python to be selected. I think this is

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:29:29PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the cmd prefix, you will inevitably get a command window. That's the only way to use batch files on Windows

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:43:36PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the cmd prefix, you will inevitably get a command window. So in some sense it does

Re: 2.1 release status

On 13 Mar 2014 at 21:48:16 , Georg Baum (georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de) wrote: Benjamin Piwowarski wrote:  > I have another question (this was what I was trying to fix also):  > - why the python2() code in os.cpp (line 41) does not prevent the wrong  > python to be selected.  I think this is

Re: 2.1 release status

On 13 Mar 2014 at 21:48:16 , Georg Baum (georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de) wrote: Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: > I have another question (this was what I was trying to fix also): > - why the python2() code in os.cpp (line 41) does not prevent the wrong > python to be selected. I think this

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:29:29PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > > I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of > QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the "cmd" > prefix, you will inevitably get a command window. That's the only way to use batch files on

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:43:36PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > > > I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of > > QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the "cmd" > > prefix, you will inevitably get a command window. > > So in some

Re: 2.1 release status

Besides this I have 2 further issues open: - pdfcrop, that we use for cropped PDF output does not work on Windows 64bit (I sent a fix to the maintainer) Using pdfcrop is a new feature and this will not be blocking the release. This is not a LyX bug, so we should not wait for it. If it's

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Uwe Stöhr uwesto...@web.de wrote: Am 12.03.2014 22:01, schrieb Georg Baum: Uwe Stöhr wrote: I asked already for a list of features with missing documentation, but got no reply, so here is the question again: Which features are not yet documented? the red

Re: 2.1 release status

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Uwe Stöhr uwesto...@web.de wrote: Am 10.03.2014 21:47, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: I'm now confused on the status on Windows. For me it looks rather ok. I just finished the Win installer for LyX 2.1. But LyX itself cannot be released as it is because:

Re: 2.1 release status

Is it correct that the MacOS problems are now all solved except for some cosmetic issues ? I don't know. Currently it's not clear. The package I've build is usable on Benjamin's 10.9 and it's not usable on the machine of the OP of ticket 8925. That's very strange. [...] We have to

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 um 10:41 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn v...@lyx.org: Is it correct that the MacOS problems are now all solved except for some cosmetic issues ? I don't know. Currently it's not clear. The package I've build is usable on Benjamin's 10.9 and it's not usable on the machine

Re: 2.1 release status

However, it still doesn't work for the OP of #8925. 5 days ago, he couldn't find a patched dmg. I don't know what is patched, but are you still sure the new package doesn't work on his machine ? The OP had python3 from macports installed. The path_prefix of LyX on Mac sets

Re: 2.1 release status

Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: I have another question (this was what I was trying to fix also): - why the python2() code in os.cpp (line 41) does not prevent the wrong python to be selected. I think this is the most important question. After all, we do not have control over PATH, and in many

Re: 2.1 release status

aparsloe wrote: For instance, under the format LyX in the Viewer slots I have put Custom and notepad++ (a Windows text editor). Clicking on the View other formats View LyX button displays the LyX file in its native format in the text editor but with the command window also showing. However,

Re: 2.1 release status

Georg Baum schreef op 13-3-2014 22:20: aparsloe wrote: For instance, under the format LyX in the Viewer slots I have put Custom and notepad++ (a Windows text editor). Clicking on the View other formats View LyX button displays the LyX file in its native format in the text editor but with the

Re: 2.1 release status

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the cmd prefix, you will inevitably get a command window. So in some sense it does what it is told to do;-) Omitting the cmd could be a solution. Does

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn v...@lyx.org wrote: I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the cmd prefix, you will inevitably get a command window. Omitting the cmd could be a solution. Does it

Re: 2.1 release status

On 14/03/2014 10:20 a.m., Georg Baum wrote: aparsloe wrote: For instance, under the format LyX in the Viewer slots I have put Custom and notepad++ (a Windows text editor). Clicking on the View other formats View LyX button displays the LyX file in its native format in the text editor but

Re: 2.1 release status

> >> Besides this I have 2 further issues open: >> - pdfcrop, that we use for cropped PDF output does not work on Windows >> 64bit (I sent a fix to the maintainer) > Using pdfcrop is a new feature and this will not be blocking the release. > > This is not a LyX bug, so we should not wait for it.

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 12.03.2014 22:01, schrieb Georg Baum: > >> Uwe Stöhr wrote: > > >> I asked already for a list of features with missing documentation, but got >> no reply, so here is the question again: Which features are not yet >>

Re: 2.1 release status

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 10.03.2014 21:47, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: > > >> I'm now confused on the status on Windows. For me it looks rather ok. > > > I just finished the Win installer for LyX 2.1. But LyX itself cannot be > released as it

Re: 2.1 release status

>> Is it correct that the MacOS problems are now all solved except for some >> cosmetic issues ? > > I don't know. Currently it's not clear. The package I've build is usable on > Benjamin's 10.9 > and it's not usable on the machine of the OP of ticket 8925. That's very > strange. [...] > We

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 13.03.2014 um 10:41 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn : >>> Is it correct that the MacOS problems are now all solved except for some >>> cosmetic issues ? >> >> I don't know. Currently it's not clear. The package I've build is usable on >> Benjamin's 10.9 >> and it's not usable

Re: 2.1 release status

> > > > However, it still doesn't work for the OP of #8925. 5 days ago, he > > couldn't find a "patched" dmg. I don't know what is patched, but are > > you still sure the new package doesn't work on his machine ? > > The OP had python3 from macports installed. > > The path_prefix of LyX on Mac

Re: 2.1 release status

Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: > I have another question (this was what I was trying to fix also): > - why the python2() code in os.cpp (line 41) does not prevent the wrong > python to be selected. I think this is the most important question. After all, we do not have control over PATH, and in

Re: 2.1 release status

aparsloe wrote: > For instance, under the format LyX in the Viewer slots I have put Custom > and notepad++ (a Windows text editor). Clicking on the View other > formats > View LyX button displays the LyX file in its native format in > the text editor but with the command window also showing.

Re: 2.1 release status

Georg Baum schreef op 13-3-2014 22:20: aparsloe wrote: For instance, under the format LyX in the Viewer slots I have put Custom and notepad++ (a Windows text editor). Clicking on the View other formats > View LyX button displays the LyX file in its native format in the text editor but with the

Re: 2.1 release status

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of > QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the "cmd" > prefix, you will inevitably get a command window. So in some sense it does what it is told to do;-) > Omitting the "cmd" could be a

Re: 2.1 release status

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > I did some debugging. The problem lies in the use of > QProcess::startDetached. If you call this function with a the "cmd" prefix, > you will inevitably get a command window. > > Omitting the "cmd" could be a

Re: 2.1 release status

On 14/03/2014 10:20 a.m., Georg Baum wrote: aparsloe wrote: For instance, under the format LyX in the Viewer slots I have put Custom and notepad++ (a Windows text editor). Clicking on the View other formats > View LyX button displays the LyX file in its native format in the text editor but

Re: 2.1 release status

Uwe Stöhr wrote: I just finished the Win installer for LyX 2.1. But LyX itself cannot be released as it is because: - the documentation is not yet fully updated and I recently found bugs for every new feature I described in the docs. I you aim for a bug free release then it will never

Re: 2.1 release status

On 13/03/2014 10:01 a.m., Georg Baum wrote: Uwe Stöhr wrote: - Windows-specific: when you view a PDF a console window pops up and does not disappear. This a super annoying regression to LyX 2.0 It can't be super annoying. This is known for several months, and there is no bug entry targeted to

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 12.03.2014 22:01, schrieb Georg Baum: Uwe Stöhr wrote: I asked already for a list of features with missing documentation, but got no reply, so here is the question again: Which features are not yet documented? the red ones in http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX21 - Windows-specific: when

Re: 2.1 release status

On 03/12/2014 08:01 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: Am 12.03.2014 22:01, schrieb Georg Baum: Uwe Stöhr wrote: I asked already for a list of features with missing documentation, but got no reply, so here is the question again: Which features are not yet documented? the red ones in

Re: 2.1 release status

Uwe Stöhr wrote: > I just finished the Win installer for LyX 2.1. But LyX itself cannot be > released as it is because: > > - the documentation is not yet fully updated and I recently found bugs for > every new feature I described in the docs. I you aim for a bug free release then it will never

Re: 2.1 release status

On 13/03/2014 10:01 a.m., Georg Baum wrote: Uwe Stöhr wrote: - Windows-specific: when you view a PDF a console window pops up and does not disappear. This a super annoying regression to LyX 2.0 It can't be super annoying. This is known for several months, and there is no bug entry targeted to

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 12.03.2014 22:01, schrieb Georg Baum: Uwe Stöhr wrote: I asked already for a list of features with missing documentation, but got no reply, so here is the question again: Which features are not yet documented? the red ones in http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/NewInLyX21 - Windows-specific: when

Re: 2.1 release status

On 03/12/2014 08:01 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: Am 12.03.2014 22:01, schrieb Georg Baum: Uwe Stöhr wrote: I asked already for a list of features with missing documentation, but got no reply, so here is the question again: Which features are not yet documented? the red ones in

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 10.03.2014 um 21:47 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn v...@lyx.org: Georg Baum schreef op 3-3-2014 22:28: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: The status now is that we can release 2.1 as soon as the Mac Cocoa problems listed in #8959 are resolved: I think we should aim at a release in March. Do a

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 10.03.2014 um 21:47 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn : > Georg Baum schreef op 3-3-2014 22:28: >> Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: >> >>> The status now is that we can release 2.1 as soon as the Mac Cocoa >>> problems listed in #8959 are resolved: >>> >>> I think we should aim at a

Re: 2.1 release status

Uwe Stöhr schreef op 4-3-2014 0:20: Am 03.03.2014 22:28, schrieb Georg Baum: Thanks for the update, Jürgen, I agree. Uwe, are you finished with the documentation until then? No. There is still too much to do and the translators also need time. I will see what I can do this week. Is it

Re: 2.1 release status

Georg Baum schreef op 21-2-2014 21:55: Hi, fortunately there was a lot of activity in trac during the last days/weeks, so although it might look on the list that the upcoming release is not being worked on this is not true. However, I believe it would be good to get a clear picture of what is

Re: 2.1 release status

Georg Baum schreef op 3-3-2014 22:28: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: The status now is that we can release 2.1 as soon as the Mac Cocoa problems listed in #8959 are resolved: I think we should aim at a release in March. Do a RC in mid March, and then release two weeks later, if no urgent problems

Re: 2.1 release status

On 03/10/2014 04:47 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Georg Baum schreef op 3-3-2014 22:28: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: The status now is that we can release 2.1 as soon as the Mac Cocoa problems listed in #8959 are resolved: I think we should aim at a release in March. Do a RC in mid March,

Re: 2.1 release status

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I don't understand. We package Python with LyX and we install Python in a subdir of the C:\Program Files (x86)\LyX. Then we add this directory to the path ourselves. How come that we suddenly use Python3.0 ? Probably because the windows system path takes

Re: 2.1 release status

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: I agree with you. IMO, the critical bugs left in the bug tracker are difficult to fix, and have been around for a long time. Is it correct that the MacOS problems are now all solved except for some cosmetic issues ? Stefan, are you ok with release a version

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 10.03.2014 20:52, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: I don't understand. We package Python with LyX and we install Python in a subdir of the C:\Program Files (x86)\LyX. Then we add this directory to the path ourselves. How come that we suddenly use Python3.0 ? Yes, it seems that the bug

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 10.03.2014 21:47, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: I'm now confused on the status on Windows. For me it looks rather ok. I just finished the Win installer for LyX 2.1. But LyX itself cannot be released as it is because: - the documentation is not yet fully updated and I recently found

Re: 2.1 release status

Uwe Stöhr schreef op 4-3-2014 0:20: Am 03.03.2014 22:28, schrieb Georg Baum: Thanks for the update, Jürgen, I agree. Uwe, are you finished with the documentation until then? No. There is still too much to do and the translators also need time. I will see what I can do this week. Is it

Re: 2.1 release status

Georg Baum schreef op 21-2-2014 21:55: Hi, fortunately there was a lot of activity in trac during the last days/weeks, so although it might look on the list that the upcoming release is not being worked on this is not true. However, I believe it would be good to get a clear picture of what is

Re: 2.1 release status

Georg Baum schreef op 3-3-2014 22:28: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: The status now is that we can release 2.1 as soon as the Mac Cocoa problems listed in #8959 are resolved: I think we should aim at a release in March. Do a RC in mid March, and then release two weeks later, if no urgent problems

Re: 2.1 release status

On 03/10/2014 04:47 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Georg Baum schreef op 3-3-2014 22:28: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: The status now is that we can release 2.1 as soon as the Mac Cocoa problems listed in #8959 are resolved: I think we should aim at a release in March. Do a RC in mid March,

Re: 2.1 release status

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > I don't understand. We package Python with LyX and we install Python in > a subdir of the "C:\Program Files (x86)\LyX". Then we add this directory > to the path ourselves. How come that we suddenly use Python3.0 ? Probably because the windows system path takes

Re: 2.1 release status

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > I agree with you. IMO, the critical bugs left in the bug tracker are > difficult to fix, and have been around for a long time. > > Is it correct that the MacOS problems are now all solved except for some > cosmetic issues ? Stefan, are you ok with release a

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 10.03.2014 20:52, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: I don't understand. We package Python with LyX and we install Python in a subdir of the "C:\Program Files (x86)\LyX". Then we add this directory to the path ourselves. How come that we suddenly use Python3.0 ? Yes, it seems that the bug

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 10.03.2014 21:47, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: I'm now confused on the status on Windows. For me it looks rather ok. I just finished the Win installer for LyX 2.1. But LyX itself cannot be released as it is because: - the documentation is not yet fully updated and I recently found

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 05.03.2014 um 00:25 schrieb Stephan Witt st.w...@gmx.net: Am 04.03.2014 um 23:45 schrieb Benjamin Piwowarski benjamin.piwowar...@gmail.com: For some unknown reason, on OS X 10.9, I can reproduce the Omega bug with Stephan's QT4/cocoa build but not with the QT5/cocoa one… So,

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 05.03.2014 um 00:25 schrieb Stephan Witt : > Am 04.03.2014 um 23:45 schrieb Benjamin Piwowarski > : > >> For some unknown reason, on OS X 10.9, I can reproduce the Omega bug with >> Stephan's QT4/cocoa build but not with the QT5/cocoa one… >

Re: 2.1 release status

04/03/2014 00:20, Uwe Stöhr: No. There is still too much to do and the translators also need time. I will see what I can do this week. Is it really that pressing? I mean I will for sure find further issues while updating the docs and I think we should take the time to fix as many bugs as

Re: 2.1 release status

Uwe Stöhr wrote: Am 03.03.2014 22:28, schrieb Georg Baum: Thanks for the update, Jürgen, I agree. Uwe, are you finished with the documentation until then? No. There is still too much to do and the translators also need time. I will see what I can do this week. What is missing? I agree

Re: 2.1 release status

OK, I updated the documentation - there are now two patches (one to update the code for a better version - I hope it can make it for 2.1, one for the documentation) attached to issue #8185. http://lyx.lyx.org/trac/ticket/8185 Benjamin On 03 Mar 2014, at 16:12 , Richard Heck rgh...@lyx.org

Re: 2.1 release status

For some unknown reason, on OS X 10.9, I can reproduce the Omega bug with Stephan's QT4/cocoa build but not with the QT5/cocoa one... benjamin On 03 Mar 2014, at 21:48 , Georg Baum georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de wrote: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: with the latest

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 04.03.2014 um 23:45 schrieb Benjamin Piwowarski benjamin.piwowar...@gmail.com: For some unknown reason, on OS X 10.9, I can reproduce the Omega bug with Stephan's QT4/cocoa build but not with the QT5/cocoa one… So, they've changed the QTextEngine. No magic. That's one of the pros to use

Re: 2.1 release status

04/03/2014 00:20, Uwe Stöhr: No. There is still too much to do and the translators also need time. I will see what I can do this week. Is it really that pressing? I mean I will for sure find further issues while updating the docs and I think we should take the time to fix as many bugs as

Re: 2.1 release status

Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 03.03.2014 22:28, schrieb Georg Baum: > >> Thanks for the update, Jürgen, I agree. Uwe, are you finished with the >> documentation until then? > > No. There is still too much to do and the translators also need time. I > will see what I can do this week. What is missing?

Re: 2.1 release status

OK, I updated the documentation - there are now two patches (one to update the code for a better version - I hope it can make it for 2.1, one for the documentation) attached to issue #8185. http://lyx.lyx.org/trac/ticket/8185 Benjamin On 03 Mar 2014, at 16:12 , Richard Heck

Re: 2.1 release status

For some unknown reason, on OS X 10.9, I can reproduce the Omega bug with Stephan's QT4/cocoa build but not with the QT5/cocoa one... benjamin On 03 Mar 2014, at 21:48 , Georg Baum wrote: > Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > >> Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: >>> with

Re: 2.1 release status

Am 04.03.2014 um 23:45 schrieb Benjamin Piwowarski : > For some unknown reason, on OS X 10.9, I can reproduce the Omega bug with > Stephan's QT4/cocoa build but not with the QT5/cocoa one… So, they've changed the QTextEngine. No magic. That's one of the pros to

Re: 2.1 release status

Hi, with the latest build that Stephan sent me (qt4+cocoa), on OS X 10.9, - glyphs bugs are still there (7954 and 8945) - I have no idea of the difficulty of solving those issues, - bug 8925 is fixed - I cannot reproduce crashes 7959 and 8632 - I don't understand bug 8942 (what is the menu bar

Re: 2.1 release status

Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: with the latest build that Stephan sent me (qt4+cocoa), on OS X 10.9, - glyphs bugs are still there (7954 and 8945) - I have no idea of the difficulty of solving those issues, I suggest you first check whether the problem is with the workaround in

Re: 2.1 release status

Regarding OS X, there is a new functionality - applescript support - which is not documented at all. As I submitted the patch, I could also modify the documentation but where should I put this? benjamin On 03 Mar 2014, at 08:41 , Jürgen Spitzmüller sp...@lyx.org wrote: Georg Baum wrote:

Re: 2.1 release status

On 03/03/2014 04:19 AM, Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: Regarding OS X, there is a new functionality - applescript support - which is not documented at all. As I submitted the patch, I could also modify the documentation but where should I put this? I would add it to the Additional Features

Re: 2.1 release status

On 03/03/2014 03:56 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: - I don't understand bug 8942 (what is the menu bar options list?) I asked the reporter. This was the bug that 2.0.7.1 fixed. Richard

Re: 2.1 release status

Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Benjamin Piwowarski wrote: with the latest build that Stephan sent me (qt4+cocoa), on OS X 10.9, - glyphs bugs are still there (7954 and 8945) - I have no idea of the difficulty of solving those issues, I suggest you first check whether the problem is with the

  1   2   >