On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 12:54:21AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a
beta
release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I am proposing two dates:
alpha 1 - 19 March
beta 1 - 2 April
Comments
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 07:22:53 Andre Poenitz wrote:
Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
regressions.
OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
Andre'
--
José Abílio
Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
regressions.
OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
of course i didnt mean beta, when we haven't even alpha released.
pavel
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Pavel Sanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
regressions.
OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
of course i didnt mean beta, when we haven't even alpha released.
Then
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 13:33:48 Bo Peng wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Pavel Sanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
regressions.
OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
of course
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 09:06:47AM +0100, José Matos wrote:
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 07:22:53 Andre Poenitz wrote:
Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
regressions.
OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
That would be fine IMO.
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 12:54:21AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a
> > beta
> > release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
> >
> > So I am proposing two dates:
> > alpha 1 - 19 March
> > beta 1 - 2 April
> >
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 07:22:53 Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
> regressions.
OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
> Andre'
--
José Abílio
> > Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
> > regressions.
>
> OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
of course i didnt mean beta, when we haven't even alpha released.
pavel
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Pavel Sanda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
> > > regressions.
> >
> > OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
>
> of course i didnt mean beta, when we haven't even alpha
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 13:33:48 Bo Peng wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Pavel Sanda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
> > > >
> > > > regressions.
> > >
> > > OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 09:06:47AM +0100, José Matos wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 April 2008 07:22:53 Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >
> > Well, I still don't think the code is stable, and we have significant
> > regressions.
>
> OTHO I am considering an alpha 2 release. Any objection?
That would be fine
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a
beta
release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I am proposing two dates:
alpha 1 - 19 March
beta 1 - 2 April
Comments and suggestions are welcome...
~ $ date
Wed Apr 2 00:53:12
> Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a
> beta
> release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
>
> So I am proposing two dates:
> alpha 1 - 19 March
> beta 1 - 2 April
>
> Comments and suggestions are welcome...
~ $ date
Wed Apr 2
Dominik Böhm wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Stefan Schimanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to only
include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
Maybe being
Dominik Böhm wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Stefan Schimanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to only
include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
Maybe
Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 07:11:47PM +0100, Edwin Leuven wrote:
would be nice if everybody who uses tables could check whether the
conversion goes well (do the lines look ok?), and whether line setting
makes sense (can you get the lines you could get before, etc).
On Wednesday 19 March 2008 08:10:19 Edwin Leuven wrote:
josé opinions about how to do this?
edwin
PS i will commit this in the meantime
I have extended your fix as explained in a later message.
--
José Abílio
José Matos wrote:
I have extended your fix as explained in a later message.
thanks!
Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 07:11:47PM +0100, Edwin Leuven wrote:
would be nice if everybody who uses tables could check whether the
conversion goes well (do the lines look ok?), and whether line setting
makes sense (can you get the lines you could get before, etc).
On Wednesday 19 March 2008 08:10:19 Edwin Leuven wrote:
> josé opinions about how to do this?
>
> edwin
>
> PS i will commit this in the meantime
I have extended your fix as explained in a later message.
--
José Abílio
José Matos wrote:
I have extended your fix as explained in a later message.
thanks!
Edwin Leuven wrote:
Stefan Schimanski wrote:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
i would like to commit my tab lines patch before we freeze
and, latest version attached...
Index: development/FORMAT
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Stefan Schimanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to only
include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
Maybe being the only person using
Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But there are many bugs to fix to be able to use LyX 1.6
for real work. Here's just a list of regressions targetted for LyX 1.6.0:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Uwe Stöhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But there are many bugs to fix to
be able to use LyX 1.6
for real
Uwe Stöhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But there are many bugs to
fix to be able to use LyX 1.6 for real work. Here's just a list of
regressions
On Tuesday 18 March 2008 09:38:12 Edwin Leuven wrote:
and, latest version attached...
OK. Go on, but please wait for Juergen's patch on extending the inset space. I
would like to have the changes to inset space placed together.
--
José Abílio
José Matos wrote:
OK. Go on, but please wait for Juergen's patch on extending the inset
space. I would like to have the changes to inset space placed together.
I took this as an OK and will put it in in a minute.
Sorry, Edwin, for the extra work.
Jürgen
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 6:59 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Uwe Stöhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But there are many bugs
José Matos wrote:
On Tuesday 18 March 2008 09:38:12 Edwin Leuven wrote:
and, latest version attached...
OK. Go on, but please wait for Juergen's patch on extending the inset space. I
would like to have the changes to inset space placed together.
ok, it is in
would be nice if everybody who
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 07:11:47PM +0100, Edwin Leuven wrote:
would be nice if everybody who uses tables could check whether the
conversion goes well (do the lines look ok?), and whether line setting
makes sense (can you get the lines you could get before, etc).
Please find attached a file
Edwin Leuven wrote:
Stefan Schimanski wrote:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
i would like to commit my tab lines patch before we freeze
and, latest version attached...
Index: development/FORMAT
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Stefan Schimanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
>
> I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to only
> include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
Maybe being the only person
> Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
> that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But there are many bugs to fix to be able to use LyX 1.6
for real work. Here's just a list of regressions targetted for LyX 1.6.0:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
> > that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
>
> LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But there are many bugs to fix to
> be able to use LyX 1.6
>
Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
>> that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
>
> LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But there are many bugs to
> fix to be able to use LyX 1.6 for real work. Here's just a list of
>
On Tuesday 18 March 2008 09:38:12 Edwin Leuven wrote:
> and, latest version attached...
OK. Go on, but please wait for Juergen's patch on extending the inset space. I
would like to have the changes to inset space placed together.
--
José Abílio
José Matos wrote:
> OK. Go on, but please wait for Juergen's patch on extending the inset
> space. I would like to have the changes to inset space placed together.
I took this as an OK and will put it in in a minute.
Sorry, Edwin, for the extra work.
Jürgen
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 6:59 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Uwe Stöhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Maybe being the only person using LyX 1.6.0 for real work, I think
> >> that LyX is ready for an alpha version.
> >
> > LyX is indeed ready for an alpha release. But
José Matos wrote:
On Tuesday 18 March 2008 09:38:12 Edwin Leuven wrote:
and, latest version attached...
OK. Go on, but please wait for Juergen's patch on extending the inset space. I
would like to have the changes to inset space placed together.
ok, it is in
would be nice if everybody who
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 07:11:47PM +0100, Edwin Leuven wrote:
> would be nice if everybody who uses tables could check whether the
> conversion goes well (do the lines look ok?), and whether line setting
> makes sense (can you get the lines you could get before, etc).
Please find attached a
Am 13.03.2008 um 08:28 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
So I am proposing two dates:
alpha 1 - 19 March
beta 1 - 2 April
Fine with me. But the new version contains so many new features that
I will not be ready with the docs. I won't find time to work on the
docs before beta 1. So I
Stefan Schimanski schrieb:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to only
include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
24 hors are fine with me. But your bugfix for 4566 should go in before if
possible
Am 17.03.2008 um 23:09 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
Stefan Schimanski schrieb:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the
alpha?
I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to
only include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
24 hors are fine with me. But your
Stefan Schimanski wrote:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
i would like to commit my tab lines patch before we freeze
Am 13.03.2008 um 08:28 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> So I am proposing two dates:
> alpha 1 - 19 March
> beta 1 - 2 April
Fine with me. But the new version contains so many new features that
I will not be ready with the docs. I won't find time to work on the
docs before beta 1. So
Stefan Schimanski schrieb:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to only
include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
24 hors are fine with me. But your bugfix for 4566 should go in before if
possible
Am 17.03.2008 um 23:09 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
Stefan Schimanski schrieb:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the
alpha?
I would propose that we make a mini freeze of 24 or 48 hours to
only include show stopper fixes. Opinions?
24 hors are fine with me. But your
Stefan Schimanski wrote:
To bring this thread to the top again: what is the status for the alpha?
i would like to commit my tab lines patch before we freeze
beta 1 - 2 April
I forgot that I have to do a fileformat change to get Japanese properly working, but won't have the
time to work on that stuff before beta 1. IS it OK to do it after beta 1 is out?
I promised that LyX 1.6 will work for Japanese and Koji Yokata invested a lot of time
I forgot that I have to do a fileformat change to get Japanese properly
working, but won't have the time to work on that stuff before beta 1. IS it
OK to do it after beta 1 is out?
fileformat change is allowed after beta.
fileformat change is not allowed after stable release is released.
On Friday 14 March 2008 14:32:46 Pavel Sanda wrote:
fileformat change is allowed after beta.
fileformat change is not allowed after stable release is released.
Right. :-)
however there are inconsistencies between official site and wiki
whether release candidate is considered to be a stable
> beta 1 - 2 April
I forgot that I have to do a fileformat change to get Japanese properly working, but won't have the
time to work on that stuff before beta 1. IS it OK to do it after beta 1 is out?
I promised that LyX 1.6 will work for Japanese and Koji Yokata invested a lot of time
> I forgot that I have to do a fileformat change to get Japanese properly
> working, but won't have the time to work on that stuff before beta 1. IS it
> OK to do it after beta 1 is out?
fileformat change is allowed after beta.
fileformat change is not allowed after stable release is released.
On Friday 14 March 2008 14:32:46 Pavel Sanda wrote:
> fileformat change is allowed after beta.
> fileformat change is not allowed after stable release is released.
Right. :-)
> however there are inconsistencies between official site and wiki
> whether release candidate is considered to be a
So I am proposing two dates:
alpha 1 - 19 March
beta 1 - 2 April
Fine with me. But the new version contains so many new features that I will not be ready with the
docs. I won't find time to work on the docs before beta 1. So I would like when a release candidate
is not
On Thursday 13 March 2008 07:28:12 Uwe Stöhr wrote:
So I am proposing two dates:
alpha 1 - 19 March
beta 1 - 2 April
Fine with me. But the new version contains so many new features that I will
not be ready with the docs. I won't find time to work on the docs before
> So I am proposing two dates:
> alpha 1 - 19 March
> beta 1 - 2 April
Fine with me. But the new version contains so many new features that I will not be ready with the
docs. I won't find time to work on the docs before beta 1. So I would like when a release candidate
is not
On Thursday 13 March 2008 07:28:12 Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> > So I am proposing two dates:
> > alpha 1 - 19 March
> > beta 1 - 2 April
>
> Fine with me. But the new version contains so many new features that I will
> not be ready with the docs. I won't find time to work on the docs
José Matos wrote:
Hi all,
I, and many others on this list, think that we are ready to release the first
alpha release for 1.6.
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a beta
release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I am proposing two dates:
Fine with me.
Me too.
Bo
Hi all,
I, and many others on this list, think that we are ready to release the
first
alpha release for 1.6.
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a
beta
release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I am proposing two dates:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
José Matos wrote:
Hi all,
I, and many others on this list, think that we are ready to
release the first alpha release for 1.6.
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly
to a beta release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I
José Matos wrote:
Hi all,
I, and many others on this list, think that we are ready to release the first
alpha release for 1.6.
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a beta
release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I am proposing two dates:
> Fine with me.
Me too.
Bo
Hi all,
I, and many others on this list, think that we are ready to release the
first
alpha release for 1.6.
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly to a
beta
release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I am proposing two dates:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
José Matos wrote:
Hi all,
I, and many others on this list, think that we are ready to
release the first alpha release for 1.6.
Since the code seems stable I think that we can proceed directly
to a beta release 3 to 4 weeks after the first release.
So I
68 matches
Mail list logo
