Joost Verburg wrote:
Bo Peng wrote:
So at least python.exe, sh.exe etc will be in, right? Installing full
python and msys is unacceptable even if they are downloaded
automatically.
Yes, these very essential GPL-compatible things (LyX won't configure or
run without them), will be bundled. It
Angus Leeming wrote:
You're correct. LyX will function perfectly well without ImageMagick.
How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
GIF-images and export to PDF, etc.
That isn't function perfectly
Uwe == Uwe Stöhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uwe Angus Leeming wrote:
You're correct. LyX will function perfectly well without
ImageMagick.
Uwe How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
Uwe JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
Uwe GIF-images
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
Uwe How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
Uwe JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
Uwe GIF-images and export to PDF, etc. That isn't function perfectly
Uwe well in my opinion.
Some functions do not work, but
Btw. It's one of LyX's strengths that you can use every kind of image
formats directly in LyX - there's no other text program who can do this.
When I want to advertise LyX this is a killer argument, because users
don't want to convert images from various sources to a certain format to
be able to
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Right, but the installer is for all users. Only a few users know the
details about graphics. Most of my collegues for example used EPS-images
because they didn't know that PDF can embed JPG, PNG and PDF-images
directly. So the installer must include Imagemagick by default
Bo Peng wrote:
This is perhaps unrelated. The biggest advantages of SWP, according to
one of my friends, is that one can paste windows wmf figures directlry
to SWP. I do not know how SWP is handling that, but from what I
searched last time, there is no usable WMF-whatever converters.
SWP has
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 06:04:09PM +0200, Joost Verburg wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know LyX can be used with
limited graphic support without ImageMagick.
That's correct.
It should of course be recommended to let the installer download
ImageMagick for you if it's not yet
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 05:15:26PM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Angus Leeming wrote:
You're correct. LyX will function perfectly well without ImageMagick.
How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have lived without jpg-ps and gif-pdf conversions for the bigger
part of my life and did not really miss that functionality.
Ahhh, but that's because you're all of:
* clever
* a mathematician
* someone whose æsthetics allow him to use one of the
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 08:28:10PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have lived without jpg-ps and gif-pdf conversions for the bigger
part of my life and did not really miss that functionality.
Ahhh, but that's because you're all of:
* clever
* a
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:22:52PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 08:28:10PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have lived without jpg-ps and gif-pdf conversions for the bigger
part of my life and did not really miss that
Joost Verburg wrote:
Bo Peng wrote:
So at least python.exe, sh.exe etc will be in, right? Installing full
python and msys is unacceptable even if they are downloaded
automatically.
Yes, these very essential GPL-compatible things (LyX won't configure or
run without them), will be bundled. It
Angus Leeming wrote:
You're correct. LyX will function perfectly well without ImageMagick.
How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
GIF-images and export to PDF, etc.
That isn't "function perfectly
> "Uwe" == Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uwe> Angus Leeming wrote:
>> You're correct. LyX will function perfectly well without
>> ImageMagick.
Uwe> How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
Uwe> JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
Uwe> How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
Uwe> JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
Uwe> GIF-images and export to PDF, etc. That isn't "function perfectly
Uwe> well" in my opinion.
Some functions do not work,
Btw. It's one of LyX's strengths that you can use every kind of image
formats directly in LyX - there's no other text program who can do this.
When I want to advertise LyX this is a killer argument, because users
don't want to convert images from various sources to a certain format to
be able to
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Right, but the installer is for all users. Only a few users know the
details about graphics. Most of my collegues for example used EPS-images
because they didn't know that PDF can embed JPG, PNG and PDF-images
directly. So the installer must include Imagemagick by default
Bo Peng wrote:
This is perhaps unrelated. The biggest advantages of SWP, according to
one of my friends, is that one can paste windows wmf figures directlry
to SWP. I do not know how SWP is handling that, but from what I
searched last time, there is no usable WMF->whatever converters.
SWP has
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 06:04:09PM +0200, Joost Verburg wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know LyX can be used with
> limited graphic support without ImageMagick.
That's correct.
> It should of course be recommended to let the installer download
> ImageMagick for you if it's not
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 05:15:26PM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Angus Leeming wrote:
>
> >You're correct. LyX will function perfectly well without ImageMagick.
>
> How's that working? Without Imagemagick you can't for example use
> JPG-images and export the document to Postscript, you cannot use
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have lived without jpg->ps and gif->pdf conversions for the bigger
> part of my life and did not really miss that functionality.
Ahhh, but that's because you're all of:
* clever
* a mathematician
* someone whose æsthetics allow him to use one of
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 08:28:10PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have lived without jpg->ps and gif->pdf conversions for the bigger
> > part of my life and did not really miss that functionality.
>
> Ahhh, but that's because you're all of:
> *
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:22:52PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 08:28:10PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I have lived without jpg->ps and gif->pdf conversions for the bigger
> > > part of my life and did not really miss
Bo == Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bo Dear all, I still have not heard some agreement on how our
Bo official installer should look like. What I was proposing is
Bo something in between the two current installers that
Bo 1. free of license problem (legal) 2. only have the essentials
Bo
Bo 1. free of license problem (legal) 2. only have the essentials
Bo (small). 3. try to support a wide range of settings 4. and try not
Bo to require administrate privilege
This looks good, although there may be a case for a version that
contains everything needed or has code to grab it
Bo Peng wrote:
Bo 1. free of license problem (legal) 2. only have the essentials
Bo (small). 3. try to support a wide range of settings 4. and try not
Bo to require administrate privilege
This looks good, although there may be a case for a version that
contains everything needed or has code to
The standard installer will be small, contain only essential
GPL-compatible files and automatically download components like
ImageMagick, Ghostscript and MiKTeX if the users wants to.
So at least python.exe, sh.exe etc will be in, right? Installing full
python and msys is unacceptable even if
Joost Verburg wrote:
I'm one of the NSIS developers and have a lot of experience with Windows
software distribution, so I indeed decided that it is time to create a
new installer
Why that? What's the problem with my installer - the needed admin
permission? If this is the only problem I
Bo Peng wrote:
So at least python.exe, sh.exe etc will be in, right? Installing full
python and msys is unacceptable even if they are downloaded
automatically.
Yes, these very essential GPL-compatible things (LyX won't configure or
run without them), will be bundled. It is indeed nonsense to
I spent a lot of time on the installer and it is sad to see that
the users like it, but not the developers.
I have proposed long ago that you listen to the developers' concerns
and try to make your installers official. I was almost ready to port
your installers to the official one, untill I
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Why that? What's the problem with my installer - the needed admin
permission? If this is the only problem I suggest that you work on this
and send patches to my installer. Because there's no need to do the work
twice.
I spent a lot of time on the installer and it is sad to
Joost Verburg wrote:
It will also make better use of methods /
Windows API for the detection of external components.
I'm curious about your solution. But also a look at my code to recognize
the programs because there are many specialities. For example older
MiKTeX versions don't remove the
> "Bo" == Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bo> Dear all, I still have not heard some agreement on how our
Bo> official installer should look like. What I was proposing is
Bo> something in between the two current installers that
Bo> 1. free of license problem (legal) 2. only have the
Bo> 1. free of license problem (legal) 2. only have the essentials
Bo> (small). 3. try to support a wide range of settings 4. and try not
Bo> to require administrate privilege
This looks good, although there may be a case for a version that
contains everything needed or has code to grab it
Bo Peng wrote:
Bo> 1. free of license problem (legal) 2. only have the essentials
Bo> (small). 3. try to support a wide range of settings 4. and try not
Bo> to require administrate privilege
This looks good, although there may be a case for a version that
contains everything needed or has code
The standard installer will be small, contain only essential
GPL-compatible files and automatically download components like
ImageMagick, Ghostscript and MiKTeX if the users wants to.
So at least python.exe, sh.exe etc will be in, right? Installing full
python and msys is unacceptable even if
Joost Verburg wrote:
I'm one of the NSIS developers and have a lot of experience with Windows
software distribution, so I indeed decided that it is time to create a
new installer
Why that? What's the problem with my installer - the needed admin
permission? If this is the only problem I
Bo Peng wrote:
So at least python.exe, sh.exe etc will be in, right? Installing full
python and msys is unacceptable even if they are downloaded
automatically.
Yes, these very essential GPL-compatible things (LyX won't configure or
run without them), will be bundled. It is indeed nonsense to
I spent a lot of time on the installer and it is sad to see that
the users like it, but not the developers.
I have proposed long ago that you listen to the developers' concerns
and try to make your installers official. I was almost ready to port
your installers to the official one, untill I
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Why that? What's the problem with my installer - the needed admin
permission? If this is the only problem I suggest that you work on this
and send patches to my installer. Because there's no need to do the work
twice.
I spent a lot of time on the installer and it is sad to
Joost Verburg wrote:
It will also make better use of methods /
Windows API for the detection of external components.
I'm curious about your solution. But also a look at my code to recognize
the programs because there are many specialities. For example older
MiKTeX versions don't remove the
Dear all,
I still have not heard some agreement on how our official installer
should look like. What I was proposing is something in between the two
current installers that
1. free of license problem (legal)
2. only have the essentials (small).
3. try to support a wide range of settings
4. and
Dear all,
I still have not heard some agreement on how our official installer
should look like. What I was proposing is something in between the two
current installers that
1. free of license problem (legal)
2. only have the essentials (small).
3. try to support a wide range of settings
4. and
Bo Peng wrote:
Bo Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
Bo replaced by other gs viewers.
Which one specifically?
Maybe a cygwin/gv? I never did like the 'give me money' dialog when I
open ghostview.
I am not sure I understand your scenario. The user
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:02:27AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
Bo Peng wrote:
Bo Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
Bo replaced by other gs viewers.
Which one specifically?
Maybe a cygwin/gv? I never did like the 'give me money' dialog when I
open
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:02:27AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
Good point. Who needs view-ps anyway?
Please?
Sure, some people might like it, but it is not a common need?
Everybody can use PDF, it is faster than ps even. Well, unless they're
using pstricks.
Right. pstricks _is_ the
Bo Peng wrote:
Bo> Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
Bo> replaced by other gs viewers.
Which one specifically?
Maybe a cygwin/gv? I never did like the 'give me money' dialog when I
open ghostview.
I am not sure I understand your scenario. The user
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:02:27AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Bo Peng wrote:
>
> >>Bo> Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
> >>Bo> replaced by other gs viewers.
> >>
> >>Which one specifically?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Maybe a cygwin/gv? I never did like the 'give me
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:02:27AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Good point. Who needs "view->ps" anyway?
Please?
> Sure, some people might like it, but it is not a common need?
> Everybody can use PDF, it is faster than ps even. Well, unless they're
> using pstricks.
Right. pstricks _is_ the
Bo == Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bo It is not that ghostview should not be bundled, but that viewers
Bo are not essential part of lyx.
Users do not know about that :)
Bo Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
Bo replaced by other gs viewers.
Which one
Bo Peng wrote:
Both you and Angus have a point and I am on your side. However, if
miktex is the only program that needs administrative privilege, we can
consider getting ride of it from the bundle.
MiKTeX don't need admin privileges to be installed, choose Install
MiKTeX only for me in its
Bo Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
Bo replaced by other gs viewers.
Which one specifically?
Maybe a cygwin/gv? I never did like the 'give me money' dialog when I
open ghostview.
I am not sure I understand your scenario. The user chooses ViewPS,
windows says
This is just the case. The installer detects viewers. You can choose to
install GSview and if it's not yet installed it will be.
I meant do not bundle it at all. Give a suggestion, a link and that is
it. An official (sorry for this word again) installer should include
only the essential part of
> "Bo" == Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bo> It is not that ghostview should not be bundled, but that viewers
Bo> are not essential part of lyx.
Users do not know about that :)
Bo> Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
Bo> replaced by other gs viewers.
Bo Peng wrote:
Both you and Angus have a point and I am on your side. However, if
miktex is the only program that needs administrative privilege, we can
consider getting ride of it from the bundle.
MiKTeX don't need admin privileges to be installed, choose "Install
MiKTeX only for me" in its
> Bo> Lyx needs Python, imagemagick etc to work, but ghostview can be
> Bo> replaced by other gs viewers.
>
> Which one specifically?
Maybe a cygwin/gv? I never did like the 'give me money' dialog when I
open ghostview.
> I am not sure I understand your scenario. The user chooses View>PS,
>
> This is just the case. The installer detects viewers. You can choose to
> install GSview and if it's not yet installed it will be.
I meant do not bundle it at all. Give a suggestion, a link and that is
it. An official (sorry for this word again) installer should include
only the essential part
If you ask me anything older than W2k should not be supported at all. The
energy spent in these obsolte systems is better spent fixing real bugs.
I fully agree. I also wouldn't be able to support Win98 as I have no
access to a Win98 machine nor do I know someone who has it running.
We don't
Concerning the administrator privilege
Both you and Angus have a point and I am on your side. However, if
miktex is the only program that needs administrative privilege, we can
consider getting ride of it from the bundle.
And we are getting rid of ghostview.
No we aren't. The installer
If you ask me anything older than W2k should not be supported at all. The
energy spent in these obsolte systems is better spent fixing real bugs.
I fully agree. I also wouldn't be able to support Win98 as I have no
access to a Win98 machine nor do I know someone who has it running.
We don't
> Concerning the administrator privilege
Both you and Angus have a point and I am on your side. However, if
miktex is the only program that needs administrative privilege, we can
consider getting ride of it from the bundle.
> > And we are getting rid of ghostview.
>
> No we aren't. The
62 matches
Mail list logo
