[KBibTeX] KBibTeX 0.3-beta1

[Thomas Fischer]

Hello,

I just released KBibTeX 0.3-beta1 which is the first more-or-less
official release of KBibTeX for KDE4.

The release is fairly stable and if there are no show-stopping bugs, the
final release will be on the fast track.

You can fetch the tar balls from the download server. The homepage will
be updated soon:

http://download.gna.org/kbibtex/0.3/

Have a nice weekend,
Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/kbibtex/attachments/20110226/85f32e42/attachment.pgp>

[Michael Hanke]

Post by Thomas Fischer
Hello,
I just released KBibTeX 0.3-beta1 which is the first more-or-less
official release of KBibTeX for KDE4.
The release is fairly stable and if there are no show-stopping bugs, the
final release will be on the fast track.

Could you please put the manpage back into the tarball.

Thanks,

Michael

[Thomas Fischer]

Hello Michael,

Post by Michael Hanke
Could you please put the manpage back into the tarball.

The tar ball is already released and I don't want to mess up with
checksums etc.
The man page has been added into the 0.3 branch and will be part of the
next tar ball (beta2 or rc1 or ...).

-- Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/kbibtex/attachments/20110227/8a1326f6/attachment.pgp>

[Michael Hanke]

Post by Thomas Fischer
The release is fairly stable and if there are no show-stopping bugs, the
final release will be on the fast track.

Would it be tricky to re-add all the search URLs (e.g. pubmed)? Is it
correct that there is currently no GUI way to configure this aspect?

If that is the case I fear that I might cause some frustration if I
upload kbibtex 0.3 as a replacement of 0.2 now. However, if I wait with
the upload we get less testers and the KDE3 removal is coming.

I know that you don't intend this version to have the same level of
functionality/convenience as 0.2, but I wonder what timeframe you have
in mind to get there?

No pressure, though ;-)

Michael

[Thomas Fischer]

Hello Michael,

Post by Michael Hanke
Would it be tricky to re-add all the search URLs (e.g. pubmed)? Is it
correct that there is currently no GUI way to configure this aspect?

The internal structure of the web search module has changed considerably
compared to KBibTeX 0.2. Porting means several hours of work on average
for each module.
In SVN trunk, I added PubMed search during today's daylight time.

Post by Michael Hanke
If that is the case I fear that I might cause some frustration if I
upload kbibtex 0.3 as a replacement of 0.2 now. However, if I wait
with the upload we get less testers and the KDE3 removal is coming.

Yes. Other distributions have removed KDE3 already, therefore the
alternatives are no KBibTeX or a not-yet-complete KBibTeX.
KBibTeX 0.3 will give you probably a KDE 4.0.0 feeling ... :-P

Post by Michael Hanke
I know that you don't intend this version to have the same level of
functionality/convenience as 0.2, but I wonder what timeframe you
have in mind to get there?
No pressure, though ;-)

It is ready, when it is ready. ;-)
I don't want to sound pessimistic, but it may take several months.

-- Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/kbibtex/attachments/20110227/d7095804/attachment.pgp>

[Michael Hanke]

Post by Thomas Fischer
Hello Michael,

Post by Michael Hanke
Would it be tricky to re-add all the search URLs (e.g. pubmed)? Is it
correct that there is currently no GUI way to configure this aspect?

The internal structure of the web search module has changed considerably
compared to KBibTeX 0.2. Porting means several hours of work on average
for each module.
In SVN trunk, I added PubMed search during today's daylight time.

Perfect! This is a big plus for me personally.

Post by Thomas Fischer

Post by Michael Hanke
If that is the case I fear that I might cause some frustration if I
upload kbibtex 0.3 as a replacement of 0.2 now. However, if I wait
with the upload we get less testers and the KDE3 removal is coming.

Yes. Other distributions have removed KDE3 already, therefore the
alternatives are no KBibTeX or a not-yet-complete KBibTeX.
KBibTeX 0.3 will give you probably a KDE 4.0.0 feeling ... :-P

That is also right. I only have to figure out whether I will wait for
the last minute to replace 0.2 with 0.3...

Post by Thomas Fischer

Post by Michael Hanke
I know that you don't intend this version to have the same level of
functionality/convenience as 0.2, but I wonder what timeframe you
have in mind to get there?
No pressure, though ;-)

It is ready, when it is ready. ;-)
I don't want to sound pessimistic, but it may take several months.

... I guess the thing to ask is whether you are planning frequent
RC-releases as you are doing now, or whether it will stop at some point
again and only the final one will appear. In the former case, I believe
that I should upload 0.3 soonish to get testers and in the latter case I'd
prefer to wait as long as possible (until KD3 removal) to have the most
functional kbibtex of any version in Debian.

Hope that sounds reasonable and thanks for all your work on kbibtex,

Michael

[Ben E. Hard]

Post by Thomas Fischer
Hello,
I just released KBibTeX 0.3-beta1 which is the first more-or-less
official release of KBibTeX for KDE4.
The release is fairly stable and if there are no show-stopping bugs, the
final release will be on the fast track.
You can fetch the tar balls from the download server. The homepage will
http://download.gna.org/kbibtex/0.3/
Have a nice weekend,
Thomas

Looks pritty nice, thanks Thomas - the preview function is impressing and very
usefull!

Working with biblatex and biber, there are primarily two things which I would
appreciate very much in the next version: opening/saving in utf8 (which you
already adressed in one of the last threads) and the possibility to change the
list of entry types and the elements in the Element Editor. I use many entry
types and elements which have different names or are not used in bibtex (for
example journaltitle instead of journal, gender, entrysubtype and many more), so
it becomes quite inconvenient to use "other fields" or only the source editor
each time.

Thanks,
Ben

[Thomas Fischer]

Hello Ben,

Post by Ben E. Hard
Working with biblatex and biber, there are primarily two things which
I would appreciate very much in the next version: opening/saving in
utf8 (which you already adressed in one of the last threads)

Yes, the situation can be indeed improved ...

Post by Ben E. Hard
possibility to change the list of entry types and the elements in
the Element Editor. I use many entry types and elements which have
different names or are not used in bibtex (for example journaltitle
instead of journal, gender, entrysubtype and many more), so it
becomes quite inconvenient to use "other fields" or only the source
editor each time.

When I was started to plan for KBibTeX about 1?2 years ago, I was aware
that there were new backend under development to eventually replace the
original BibTeX.
Therefore some parts of the user interface can be re-configured very
easily using configuration files only (no changes in code).
In your case, have a look on the .rc files in config/:

fieldtypes.rc allows you to change which columns are shown in the main
list view and how to edit those fields. There is no documentation yet,
but I guess it is more or less self-explanatory.

entrytypes.rc lists which document types (articles, thesis, book, ...)
are known to KBibTeX. Here you can add more on your own.

entrylayout.rc describes the layout of the entry editing dialog: which
controls for which fields are shown in which tab. Again, no
documentation but enough examples are provided.

Feel free to experiment here and find bugs. My idea would be to make the
user interface configurable so that you can switch between a ?BibTeX?
layout and a ?BiBLaTeX/Biber? layout.

-- Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/kbibtex/attachments/20110403/09e99522/attachment.pgp>

[Ben E. Hard]

Post by Thomas Fischer
Hello Ben,

Post by Ben E. Hard
Working with biblatex and biber, there are primarily two things which
I would appreciate very much in the next version: opening/saving in
utf8 (which you already adressed in one of the last threads)

Yes, the situation can be indeed improved ...

[...]

Thanks, that's good news, I'll have a try, and if it works well, I'll send you
the files. So it seems for me, that there is only the utf-8 matter which still
prevents me of using this great software! Is it a major issue for you to, i.e.
will it take a long time (I know: it's ready when it's ready... - however, I'm
curious)?

Best
Ben

[Thomas Fischer]

Hej Ben,

Post by Ben E. Hard
Is it a
major issue for you to, i.e. will it take a long time (I know: it's
ready when it's ready... - however, I'm curious)?

I was just making some tests with saving/loading files in utf-8 encoding
and I seems to work. What was your problem exactly? Can you send me a
test case please?

-- Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/pipermail/kbibtex/attachments/20110415/5a8ca6ce/attachment.pgp>

[Ben E. Hard]

Post by Thomas Fischer
Hej Ben,

Post by Ben E. Hard
Is it a
major issue for you to, i.e. will it take a long time (I know: it's
ready when it's ready... - however, I'm curious)?

I was just making some tests with saving/loading files in utf-8 encoding
and I seems to work. What was your problem exactly? Can you send me a
test case please?

Well, actually it seems to work fine - it was just the "Source"-tab and
"Reference Preview" which suggested that Umlaute would be saved in the form
{\"o}. However, when I opened a test.bib which was formerly saved in utf-8, the
file was correctly saved with the Umlaute without the use of {\"o}, but in utf-8
with "?". So I guess, saving in utf-8 already works, only the preview suggests a
wrong saving structure.

I also was able to create custom files for entrylayout, entrytypes and
fieltypes, it works fine so far. I'll send you the ones I created for the use
with biblatex (I included the fields and entrytypes I mostly use, might be
different for other biblatex-users, as the possibilities are so rich) once I'll
have tested them a little bit.

One thing I couldn't change: if I add in "External" a local pdf, it becomes
"localfile" while I used to use "file". Don't see any problems with that so far,
just wanted to mention.

Regards,

Ben