LyX 2.4.0

[Daniel]

On 2021-12-14 10:45, Daniel wrote:
> On 14/12/2021 10:34, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>> On 12/12/21 08:55, Daniel wrote:
>>> On 2021-12-10 06:52, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>>>> On 12/9/21 03:00, Daniel wrote:
>>>>> On 2021-12-07 23:04, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/6/21 22:00, Daniel wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2021-12-06 22:58, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Do you mean by "safe enough to include" that they should be 
>>>>>>>>> more or less done? For example, there were a couple of tickets 
>>>>>>>>> where you said that you take a look at while there were things 
>>>>>>>>> that needed to be done still. I take it that this is not going 
>>>>>>>>> to happen, right?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Safe as in: Not likely to cause bugs we need to solve before the 
>>>>>>>> release. Once we hit beta, we are in bug-fixing mode, and the 
>>>>>>>> fewer the better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Riki
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Okay. (Though it is not what I have expected beta to be. I would 
>>>>>>> have thought that software in beta is actually "likely" to have 
>>>>>>> bug rather than unlikely. I would have thought the latter is 
>>>>>>> release candidate.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, we know beta will have bugs---indeed, we know of some 
>>>>>> already---but the idea is that we do our best not to create new 
>>>>>> bugs at that point. New features bring new bugs. That's why beta 
>>>>>> release goes with feature freeze.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That said, at the moment we're talking about what will make it 
>>>>>> into beta, so some risk is all right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Riki
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to do the tickets one by one. Should I post them here (with 
>>>>> reference) on the list, create a (temporary) meta bug with the list 
>>>>> of tickets, or just ping you on the tickets themselves?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe assemble a list of them, and then post it here. I'll see it, I 
>>>> hope!
>>>>
>>>> You could also add a 'triage' keyword to the bugs themselves. I've 
>>>> used that for this kind of purpose.
>>>>
>>>> Riki
>>>
>>> Here is a list of enhancements with milestone 2.4.0 and patches. I 
>>> guess it is worthwhile to go though them anyway and either apply or 
>>> re-target them:
>>>
>>> https://www.lyx.org/trac/query?status=accepted&status=assigned&status=new&status=reopened&description=~&reporter=~&summary=~&milestone=2.4.0&keywords=~patch&type=enhancement&col=id&col=summary&col=keywords&col=reporter&col=status&col=type&col=severity&desc=1&order=id
>>>
>>> I will not manage to do more than give you this list. Maybe you just 
>>> ask me if something is unclear that seems more efficient since you 
>>> will look at them carefully anyway? I could also give more info on 
>>> them but that is as much as I can do for this weekend. (Maybe I 
>>> missed the road map but some warning would have been helpful a bit in 
>>> advance. I guess it was communicated on some internal list.)
>>
>> It appears that JMarc's recent changes have introduced some serious 
>> bugs. Unsurprisingly. So there is probably some leeway for these 
>> patches. I'll also try to have a look.
>>
>> If you have the time, it would be really helpful to re-target bugs 
>> that clearly are NOT format changes. Those can definitely wait until 
>> 2.4.1.
>>
>> Riki
> 
> It is a bit more complicated, I think. There are non-format changes that 
> are (arguably) improvements on new features introduced in 2.4.0dev. 
> Wouldn't it be odd to introduce such new features without the 
> improvements in the first place?
> 
> One concrete example are the new drop-down buttons called "DynamicMenu" 
> [sic]. Currently, they aren't customizable but one of my patches makes 
> them customizable.
> 
> Daniel
> 

Down to 16 bugs. Does that seem manageable for you?

https://www.lyx.org/trac/query?status=accepted&status=assigned&status=new&status=reopened&description=~&reporter=~&summary=~&milestone=2.4.0&keywords=~patch&type=enhancement&col=id&col=summary&col=keywords&col=reporter&col=status&col=type&col=severity&desc=1&order=id

Otherwise, I can try to take a look again.

Daniel