[texworks] Automatic update of resources

[Paul A Norman]

On 17 January 2011 19:14, Stefan Löffler <st.loeffler at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2011-01-16 23:45, Paul A Norman wrote:
>
> 1. Just for clarity for people, (I'm using portable as per normal) the "resource directory" you are referring to  will normally be named "config"  on their hard-drive (?)
>
> No (if I understand the question correctly). The resource directory is where all the scripts, templates, etc. go in. As per http://code.google.com/p/texworks/wiki/TipsAndTricks#Locating_and_customizing_TeXworks_resources, this should by default be located at
> Windows XP: C:\Documents and Settings\<username>\TeXworks\
> Windows Vista/7: C:\Users\<username>\TeXworks\ (?)
> GNU/Linux: ~/.TeXworks/

Ok what I was thinking was from  following your recommendation:

        " and to possibly use Tw's portable mode "

it would be located according to "texworks-setup.ini" (?) not in the
standard place(s)?

The new regime observes "texworks-setup.ini" if present?

I had at one time from the manual (5.7  Changing the configuration)
perhaps "TW_conf" as that directory.

And then, now, from another posting, a "config" directly under my
<TeXworks> directory for convenience and portability.

defaultbinpaths = ../../../LatexUtils/MiTeX 2.8.3541 Portabe/miktex/bin
inipath = ./config
libpath = ./config

>
> 2. With syntax-patterns.txt I have made changes to it, so it will not be able update with new material over the Internet now(?)
>
> Yes. This is the same situation that we had until now. To circumvent that, we would need some kind of advanced diff/patch/version control system built into Tw, which won't happen. Besides, even full-fledged version control systems sometimes fail with automatic merges. So to update those files, you'd have to track changes manually...
>
> - am  I able to make more than one--a User's one like "syntax-patterns-user.txt ? So that the original can be left unedited--and up-datable over the Internet through your new system?
>
> No, not at the moment. This only works for files in the completion subdirectory, which are all loaded simultaneously. We could think about providing a mechanism for the -user scheme you proposed, but there are numerous problems involved. E.g., how would you remove an entry? How would you supersede an entry, and in the case of an update, should your old value or the upstream new value take precedence? That's why I went with the "the user is always right" policy that if you customize a file, the system assumes you know what you're doing and that you're taking care of implementing any new features and bug fixes yourself in "your" files.
>

I was envisaging the standard file being left alone by the user and
available for automatic updating, and the user file(s) being the last
word as it were, thinking indeed of the good situation that works for
files in the completion subdirectory.

Appreciating that if the user does change a standard file (even
putting an empty comment in it to stop updating for some reason) then
it will no longer be available for automatic updating.

Thanks,
paul



> HTH
> Stefan