Re: lyx2lyx (was: Re: Patches for 1820 and 3613)

2007-07-19 Thread José Matos
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 21:26:09 Dov Feldstern wrote: I see that rsplit is new in 2.4... Are we officially requiring python2.4 for lyx2lyx, or is this just an oversight? Oversight, we require python 2.3. I will fix this as well as the other cases. -- José Abílio

Re: lyx2lyx (was: Re: Patches for 1820 and 3613)

2007-07-19 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:17:47AM +0100, José Matos wrote: On Wednesday 18 July 2007 21:26:09 Dov Feldstern wrote: I see that rsplit is new in 2.4... Are we officially requiring python2.4 for lyx2lyx, or is this just an oversight? Oversight, we require python 2.3. I will fix this as well

Re: lyx2lyx (was: Re: Patches for 1820 and 3613)

2007-07-19 Thread José Matos
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 21:26:09 Dov Feldstern wrote: > I see that rsplit is new in 2.4... Are we officially requiring python2.4 > for lyx2lyx, or is this just an oversight? Oversight, we require python 2.3. I will fix this as well as the other cases. -- José Abílio

Re: lyx2lyx (was: Re: Patches for 1820 and 3613)

2007-07-19 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:17:47AM +0100, José Matos wrote: > On Wednesday 18 July 2007 21:26:09 Dov Feldstern wrote: > > I see that rsplit is new in 2.4... Are we officially requiring python2.4 > > for lyx2lyx, or is this just an oversight? > > Oversight, we require python 2.3. I will fix this

lyx2lyx (was: Re: Patches for 1820 and 3613)

2007-07-18 Thread Dov Feldstern
Dov Feldstern wrote: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: José Matos wrote: Since the code deals with retroversion I will place the code in svn and then ask people to test it. This code had a lot of testing so I think it is near public consumption. :-) Things are much better now. We have only one

lyx2lyx (was: Re: Patches for 1820 and 3613)

2007-07-18 Thread Dov Feldstern
Dov Feldstern wrote: Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: José Matos wrote: Since the code deals with retroversion I will place the code in svn and then ask people to test it. This code had a lot of testing so I think it is near public consumption. :-) Things are much better now. We have only one