From Damien Cassou to ~protesilaos/general-issues
Hi Prot, Protesilaos Stavrou <info@protesilaos.com> writes: > There was a difference, but it was subtle. I pushed an update now that > should make things easier. thank you for this. Unfortunately, changing the color of a 1px line isn't going to make it distinguishable for me. I haven't found any way to increase the thickness of the overline, it seems to be stuck at 1px. The only thing I have found to work is to use the style "sunken" or "raised" on the box around text in the mode-line-active face (see attached screenshot). This doesn't look good but it works. I still have
From Damien Cassou to ~protesilaos/general-issues
Hi everyone, I'm excited about the new spacious-padding-subtle-mode-line option but I don't see any difference between active and inactive buffers. A screenshot is attached to this email (with modus-operandi). Thank you for all the work on all these packages I rely on. -- Damien Cassou "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill
From Damien Cassou to ~lioploum/offpunk-packagers
Hi, thank you and Jean for the work. Adding "hatchling" as dependency automatically built and installed the 4 binaries on nix: $ ls ./result/bin/ ansicat netcache offpunk opnk I don't know how to use these additional binaries and the --help output doesn't say much either: $ ansicat --help
From Damien Cassou to ~pkal/elpa-zine
Hi Philip, Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes: >> some characters of the journal don't show well in my RSS reader. In >> particular, apostrophes are shown as "&apos". > > I tried viewing the atom feed in Emacs' newsticker, and didn't see any > issues of this kind. What RSS reader are you using? I'm using Feeder on Android: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.nononsenseapps.feeder/ The mailing list forbids attaching png files to emails. If you change that, I can attach a screenshot.
From Damien Cassou to ~pkal/elpa-zine
Hi, some characters of the journal don't show well in my RSS reader. In particular, apostrophes are shown as "&apos". Thank you for your work, I'm already waiting for the next edition! Best -- Damien Cassou "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill
From Damien Cassou to ~lioploum/offpunk-packagers
Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes: > WARNING: this is a beta1 version because the packaging is not yet > modified. While the code is running fine directly with "python > offpunk.py", it is currently not installable. Help needed here. what do you mean by "help needed"? Is there anything you want to change within the repository of offpunk or are you only talking about packagers having to do their work on their side? -- Damien Cassou "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill
From Damien Cassou to ~protesilaos/tmr
This updates the URL of makel in Makefile. -- Damien Cassou "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill
From Damien Cassou to ~lioploum/offpunk-packagers
Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes: > If packagers agree with flit, I will release a 1.9.2 that will include > flit and solves the "1.9.1 reports version 1.9" bug. no problem for nix either, I confirm it works fine. -- Damien Cassou "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill
From Damien Cassou to ~lioploum/offpunk-packagers
Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes: > This is a bug in offpunk. I forgot to increment the number. I commited > a change with the good number but the tag thus refer to the previous > commit. What do you think is the best way to fix this? I think this is a matter of deciding between: 1. This is a minor problem and users can wait until there is more to release to see this problem fixed. Problem of this solution: users of Nix are stuck with version 1.9. 2. This problem is important enough to justify by itself the release of 1.9.2 as soon as possible. Problem of this solution: more work for the packagers who want to be up-to-date.
From Damien Cassou to ~lioploum/offpunk-packagers
Hi, in Nix I introduced a test checking that --version prints the version number set in the package. This test breaks for 1.9.1: $ offpunk --version Offpunk 1.9 I was expecting the output to be "Offpunk 1.9.1". Is the package making a wrong assumption or is there a bug in Offpunk? Best --