On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Bo Peng wrote:
You can trust me on this. I am already retired so the most I can do is
sending a few suggestions when some emails happen to catch my eyes.
Vincent can ignore those comments at his own discretion.
Hi Bo,
I hope I speak for everybody when I say it's very
I hope I speak for everybody when I say it's very nice to hear from you
again[*].
Thanks. I still browse list emails from time to time and you know what
topic attracts me most. :-)
I hope your pmwiki problem at sourceforge is fully resolved now.
sourceforge.net does not allow sendmail so I
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Bo Peng wrote:
You can trust me on this. I am already retired so the most I can do is
sending a few suggestions when some emails happen to catch my eyes.
Vincent can ignore those comments at his own discretion.
Hi Bo,
I hope I speak for everybody when I say it's very
> I hope I speak for everybody when I say it's very nice to hear from you
> again[*].
Thanks. I still browse list emails from time to time and you know what
topic attracts me most. :-)
> I hope your pmwiki problem at sourceforge is fully resolved now.
sourceforge.net does not allow sendmail so
I guess I'll look forward to LyX 2.0 and embedding!
I am not sure about this. The whole embedding/bundling feature
was postponed indefinitely due to discrepancies between developers.
Because I have retired from the development of LyX, you will not
see an embedding feature in LyX 2.0 unless
I'm sort of working on the subject..
How do you think of David's proposal? Do you already have your own
proposal or even implementation somewhere?
Bo
I'm sort of working on the subject..
How do you think of David's proposal? Do you already have
your own proposal or even implementation somewhere?
Hi Bo,
It's nice to see that David is thinking with us, but as you said, I
think the proposal is not shockingly different from the things that
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
If we have such a list we can easily implement Export to directory..,
which is step 1 of the embedding/bundling feature (IMHO).
... and already make a good chunk of the users happy!
Well, at least one. :)
/Konrad
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
- to implement the features incrementally, because I'm afraid that if I
propose one large patch sometime, that we will end up in a never-ending
discussion. I think the feature is separable into small chunks, which we
can discuss individually.
- not to
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
I'm sort of working on the subject..
How do you think of David's proposal? Do you already have
your own proposal or even implementation somewhere?
Hi Bo,
It's nice to see that David is thinking with us, but as you said, I
think the
Not that I am an expert but you first step is OK with me. Note that you kind
of already have that with the Navigator for InsetGraphics.
But the need for a manifest file/registration has not been agreed upon
(my embedding approach does not need it). I disagree with your
incremental approach
Bo Peng wrote:
Not that I am an expert but you first step is OK with me. Note that you kind
of already have that with the Navigator for InsetGraphics.
But the need for a manifest file/registration has not been agreed upon
(my embedding approach does not need it).
We are only talking
We are only talking about maintaining a list of links in the Buffer structure
within LyX itself,
not in an external manifest file.
Sorry, I have not traced the development of LyX for a while...
Please, no drama this time :-)
You can trust me on this. I am already retired so the most I can
Pavel Sanda wrote:
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
I'd be happy to get feedback from you (and other experts on this issue),
its very good somebody detached from the past flames works on this and i hope
we won't lose next developer :) it would be indeed better to dissect the
>> I guess I'll look forward to LyX 2.0 and embedding!
>
>I am not sure about this. The whole embedding/bundling feature
>was postponed indefinitely due to discrepancies between developers.
>Because I have retired from the development of LyX, you will not
>see an embedding feature in LyX 2.0
> I'm sort of working on the subject..
How do you think of David's proposal? Do you already have your own
proposal or even implementation somewhere?
Bo
>> I'm sort of working on the subject..
>
>How do you think of David's proposal? Do you already have
>your own proposal or even implementation somewhere?
>
Hi Bo,
It's nice to see that David is thinking with us, but as you said, I
think the proposal is not shockingly different from the
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
If we have such a list we can easily implement "Export to directory..",
which is step 1 of the embedding/bundling feature (IMHO).
... and already make a good chunk of the users happy!
Well, at least one. :)
/Konrad
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
> - to implement the features incrementally, because I'm afraid that if I
> propose one large patch sometime, that we will end up in a never-ending
> discussion. I think the feature is separable into small chunks, which we
> can discuss individually.
>
> - not
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
I'm sort of working on the subject..
How do you think of David's proposal? Do you already have
your own proposal or even implementation somewhere?
Hi Bo,
It's nice to see that David is thinking with us, but as you said, I
think the
> Not that I am an expert but you first step is OK with me. Note that you kind
> of already have that with the Navigator for InsetGraphics.
But the need for a manifest file/registration has not been agreed upon
(my embedding approach does not need it). I disagree with your
incremental approach
Bo Peng wrote:
Not that I am an expert but you first step is OK with me. Note that you kind
of already have that with the Navigator for InsetGraphics.
But the need for a manifest file/registration has not been agreed upon
(my embedding approach does not need it).
We are only talking
> We are only talking about maintaining a list of links in the Buffer structure
> within LyX itself,
> not in an external manifest file.
Sorry, I have not traced the development of LyX for a while...
> Please, no drama this time :-)
You can trust me on this. I am already retired so the most I
Pavel Sanda wrote:
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
I'd be happy to get feedback from you (and other experts on this issue),
its very good somebody detached from the past flames works on this and i hope
we won't lose next developer :) it would be indeed better to dissect the
Greetings all -
I wanted to offer a suggestion about a portable LyX file format. This was
recently brought up on the LyX-users mailing list and has been discussed
previously (heatedly?) as documented here -
http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel/BundleSuggestions - and here -
http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel
This allows for a
lossless .lyx - .plyx - .lyx conversion. Although .plyx - .lyx - .plyx
could be lossy, a script could be used to update the manifest of a new .plyx
file based on an old .plyx file to minimize the loss.
The lossy .plyx - .lyx - .plyx conversion has been the center of all
Hello Bo -
Thanks for your thoughts. I skimmed your pdf but I'll have to give it a
fuller read later. In the meantime I wanted to respond to your post.
The lossy .plyx - .lyx - .plyx conversion has been the center of all
discussions.
As I envision things, the actual conversion of .plyx -
Apparently the file that I attached is interpreted (in my OS/browser) as a
.bin file when I try to download it. I'm assuming that's because firefox is
choking on it due to the lack of a file extension, or it's Linux and the
file starts with a period and that's a magic number...? I've made a
Thanks for your thoughts. I skimmed your pdf but I'll have to give it a
fuller read later. In the meantime I wanted to respond to your post.
I skimmed your file and it does not seem to differ much from a
previous bundling implementation. (I can be wrong here but the
manifest file etc were
Hey Bo, thanks again for your responses.
it does not seem to differ much from a previous bundling implementation...
It was due to a lot of technical and usage difficulties that that
implementation was reverted.
I found a thread from about a year ago
I found a thread from about a year ago here which may be what you're talking
about.
There were several flame wars about embedding ... to a level that the
whole lyx-devel mailinglist was hijacked and everyone involved was 2nd
degree burned. The unfruitful discussions eventually leaded to my
Greetings all -
I wanted to offer a suggestion about a portable LyX file format. This was
recently brought up on the LyX-users mailing list and has been discussed
previously (heatedly?) as documented here -
http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel/BundleSuggestions - and here -
http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel
> This allows for a
> lossless .lyx -> .plyx -> .lyx conversion. Although .plyx -> .lyx -> .plyx
> could be lossy, a script could be used to update the manifest of a new .plyx
> file based on an old .plyx file to minimize the loss.
The lossy .plyx -> .lyx -> .plyx conversion has been the center
Hello Bo -
Thanks for your thoughts. I skimmed your pdf but I'll have to give it a
fuller read later. In the meantime I wanted to respond to your post.
The lossy .plyx -> .lyx -> .plyx conversion has been the center of all
> discussions.
>
As I envision things, the actual conversion of .plyx
Apparently the file that I attached is interpreted (in my OS/browser) as a
.bin file when I try to download it. I'm assuming that's because firefox is
choking on it due to the lack of a file extension, or it's Linux and the
file starts with a period and that's a magic number...? I've made a
> Thanks for your thoughts. I skimmed your pdf but I'll have to give it a
> fuller read later. In the meantime I wanted to respond to your post.
I skimmed your file and it does not seem to differ much from a
previous bundling implementation. (I can be wrong here but the
manifest file etc were
Hey Bo, thanks again for your responses.
it does not seem to differ much from a previous bundling implementation...
> It was due to a lot of technical and usage difficulties that that
> implementation was reverted.
>
I found a thread from about a year ago
> I found a thread from about a year ago here which may be what you're talking
> about.
There were several flame wars about embedding ... to a level that the
whole lyx-devel mailinglist was hijacked and everyone involved was 2nd
degree burned. The unfruitful discussions eventually leaded to my
38 matches
Mail list logo
