We would benefit greatly from a "google docs" version of Lyx.
We frequently write papers and proposals collaboratively and
we lose a fair amount of time by having to wait for someone
else to release the document for editing or we end up with
multiple authors editing at the same time and creating
2010/9/27 Gregory Jefferis :
> On 2010-09-25 06:51, "Jose Quesada" wrote:
>
>> I tried Gobby. it's as simple as notepad, so for serious programming/writing
>> it'd feel a bit limited. But the deal breaker is no undo. Yes, you hear that
>> right. I think Gobby is actually feature-wise worse than in
On 2010-09-25 06:51, "Jose Quesada" wrote:
> I tried Gobby. it's as simple as notepad, so for serious programming/writing
> it'd feel a bit limited. But the deal breaker is no undo. Yes, you hear that
> right. I think Gobby is actually feature-wise worse than in-browser
> alternatives.
For anyon
Gregory Jefferis wrote:
> > Gregory Jefferis wrote:
> >> We use version control (git) + to write papers in the lab. It works fine
> >> but handling merge conflicts is still difficult; the chaps in the lab are
> >
> > in one project we 'solved' this via locking. the document could be split
> > int
On 2010-09-26 17:07, "Pavel Sanda" wrote:
> Gregory Jefferis wrote:
>> We use version control (git) + to write papers in the lab. It works fine
>> but handling merge conflicts is still difficult; the chaps in the lab are
>
> in one project we 'solved' this via locking. the document could be sp
Richard Heck wrote:
> That said, if we're talking *nix, I wonder how hard it would be to use
> LyX's multiple windows feature to implement some kind of collaborative
> editing. You only need to get that second window onto your collaborator's
> screen somehow.
we have talked about this in devel
Gregory Jefferis wrote:
> We use version control (git) + to write papers in the lab. It works fine
> but handling merge conflicts is still difficult; the chaps in the lab are
in one project we 'solved' this via locking. the document could be split
into childern (=chapters/sections) so multiple pe
2010/9/25 Wolfgang Keller :
> Hello,
>
>> A decent latex editor built on top of google docs.
>
> "Decent" and "Google apps" are mutually exclusive.
>
> Google apps is just yet another proof how ridiculously unusable _all_ "web
> apps" are for getting actual work done efficiently. And all that with
Hello,
> A decent latex editor built on top of google docs.
"Decent" and "Google apps" are mutually exclusive.
Google apps is just yet another proof how ridiculously unusable _all_ "web
apps" are for getting actual work done efficiently. And all that with
ridiculously high development effort a
Hi,
I think Greg's post is key here.
Even if the two users are never editing at the same time, having always the
latest version with all merges applied is reassuring.
@Rob: "Yet, I've never actually met anyone who writes with others in real
time." I think this is because the tech didn't even exist
Hi Kevin,
I tried Gobby. it's as simple as notepad, so for serious programming/writing
it'd feel a bit limited. But the deal breaker is no undo. Yes, you hear that
right. I think Gobby is actually feature-wise worse than in-browser
alternatives.
Best,
-Jose
Jose Quesada, PhD.
Research scientist,
M
On 09/24/2010 05:34 PM, Julien Rioux wrote:
On 24/09/2010 3:01 PM, Richard Heck wrote:
This could almost be done without any changes to LyX. Here's how.
1. Set up a cron job that does "svn up filename.lyx" every two minutes.
2. Set up another cron job that watches filename.lyx and, if it changes
On 24/09/2010 3:01 PM, Richard Heck wrote:
This could almost be done without any changes to LyX. Here's how.
1. Set up a cron job that does "svn up filename.lyx" every two minutes.
2. Set up another cron job that watches filename.lyx and, if it changes,
does "svn ci filename.lyx".
If I was craz
On 09/24/2010 01:34 PM, Gregory Jefferis wrote:
Non-interactive collaborative editing means that there can always be one
live version of a document to which anyone can apply changes that are
versioned, identified and much more likely. Essentially it solves the
conflicting merge problem by autom
On 09/24/2010 02:21 PM, Kevin Brubeck Unhammer wrote:
I think the ideal situation would look like Gobby[1] running inside
LyX (not necessarily with chat features, but at least showing where
the other user is editing), but I can understand how that would be a
lot of work to implement. Sponsorship
Steve,
> All Unleashed books are written by a main author and lots of contributing
> authors. However, it's carved up by chapter, so no chapter is collaborative.
While this may well be true in general, the two books I have
collaborated on (my only book experience) I contributed to every
chapter,
I would simply like to say that I think going too far down this road could
lead to a lot of effort, and only a marginal return. I think we do need to
make LyX better, but I don't think it needs to be too multi-purpose. You
know the whole Swiss-Army knife versus a tool that does one thing, but does
2010/9/24 Gregory Jefferis :
> Non-interactive collaborative editing means that there can always be one
> live version of a document to which anyone can apply changes that are
> versioned, identified and much more likely. Essentially it solves the
> conflicting merge problem by automatically mergi
On Friday 24 September 2010 11:29:10 Rob Oakes wrote:
> Hi Jose and other LyX-Users,
>
> Very interesting articles, thanks for sending them.
>
> While trying to digest the ideas, though, I found myself asking two
> questions and I'd be interested in your feedback. The first question, of
> cour
On Friday 24 September 2010 10:18:30 Kevin Brubeck Unhammer wrote:
> 2010/9/24 Jose Quesada :
> > Hi,
> > We've had previous discussions on whether or not it's useful to have some
> > kind of real-time collaboration in LyX.
> > The death of wave seemed to reinforce the idea that this is not a kille
Hi all,
I would distinguish two kinds of collaborative editing.
* interactive collaborative editing - 2 or more people working
simultaneously on a document
* non-interactive collaborative editing - only one person actually modifying
the document at any one time BUT others always having live acce
Hi Les,
> I had no idea people were asking for this kind of feature. Real-time
> collaboration on a document seems to me to be a formula for a colossal waste
> of time, extending the concept of endless meetings to an online equivalent.
I'm not sure if ti's people in general or just people that
On 24 September 2010 12:41, Richard Heck wrote:
>
> Still, I have to agree with Rob that doing this at the level of each
> program just seems wrong in principle. Having some very generic
> client-server model, where the program's display could show up here there
> and everywhere, and the program
On 09/24/2010 11:43 AM, Les Denham wrote:
On Friday 24 September 2010 10:29:10 Rob Oakes wrote:
Anyone else have any thoughts?
Rob,
I had no idea people were asking for this kind of feature. Real-time
collaboration on a document seems to me to be a formula for a colossal waste
of t
On Friday 24 September 2010 10:29:10 Rob Oakes wrote:
> Anyone else have any thoughts?
>
Rob,
I had no idea people were asking for this kind of feature. Real-time
collaboration on a document seems to me to be a formula for a colossal waste
of time, extending the concept of endless meetings to
Hi Jose and other LyX-Users,
Very interesting articles, thanks for sending them.
While trying to digest the ideas, though, I found myself asking two questions
and I'd be interested in your feedback. The first question, of course is
spurred by pure skepticism.
In what instances do you think th
Hi Kevin, Jose et al,
We use version control (git) + to write papers in the lab. It works fine
but handling merge conflicts is still difficult; the chaps in the lab are
all very computer literate but I regularly have to help out with a broken
merge. It's certainly too complicated for me to insist
2010/9/24 Jose Quesada :
> Hi,
> We've had previous discussions on whether or not it's useful to have some
> kind of real-time collaboration in LyX.
> The death of wave seemed to reinforce the idea that this is not a killer
> feature, and people don't need it. Collaboration using a VCS is sufficien
Hi,
We've had previous discussions on whether or not it's useful to have some
kind of real-time collaboration in LyX.
The death of wave seemed to reinforce the idea that this is not a killer
feature, and people don't need it. Collaboration using a VCS is sufficient.
Well, recently I found two coun
29 matches
Mail list logo
