On Friday 24 January 2003 16:40, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> >
> > Well, given that lyx changes its release numbering scheme every release
> >
>
> Hey, can the next one be 1.IV?
And then the fix releases would be 1.IV.a, 1.IV.b...
We have the linux style, the fetchmail style and now
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 03:05:28PM +, John Levon wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:38:40AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Why not use the same option for specifying either a lyx version or a
> > file format? It is not like we are going to release LyX 215 one of
> > these days...
> W
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:38:40AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Why not use the same option for specifying either a lyx version or a
> file format? It is not like we are going to release LyX 215 one of
> these days...
Well, given that lyx changes its release numbering scheme every release
> "José" == José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
José> But 2.15 or 2.10 is reasonable. ;-) And yes those are valid
José> values regarding the fileformat and also accepted.
José> Then we will let a latent bug that will manifest itself when
José> we get those version. Then I will tell you
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:01:02AM +, José Matos wrote:
>> Ok, I will modify the patch for it.
Andre> I have no troubles using different options to differnt things.
Andre> And as you notices, 2.15 is well within reach.
It shou
On Wednesday 22 January 2003 10:06, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:01:02AM +, José Matos wrote:
> > Ok, I will modify the patch for it.
>
> I have no troubles using different options to differnt things. And as you
> notices, 2.15 is well within reach.
From beginning I w
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:01:02AM +, José Matos wrote:
> Ok, I will modify the patch for it.
I have no troubles using different options to differnt things. And as you
notices, 2.15 is well within reach.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not ha
On Wednesday 22 January 2003 09:38, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
> Why not use the same option for specifying either a lyx version or a
> file format? It is not like we are going to release LyX 215 one of
> these days...
But 2.15 or 2.10 is reasonable. ;-) And yes those are valid values regardi
> "José" == José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
José> This patch: * updates the version of lyx2lyx to match the
José> corresponing lyx version; * updates the reference to the
José> copyright date. * adds two new options to list the supported lyx
José> versions, and allow to specify it inste
On Tuesday 21 January 2003 18:35, José Matos wrote:
> This patch:
> * updates the version of lyx2lyx to match the corresponing lyx version;
> * updates the reference to the copyright date.
> * adds two new options to list the supported lyx versions, and allow to
> specify it inste
10 matches
Mail list logo
