Re: Attachments (again), posted by Andreas Luedeke on Wed Aug 31 15:00:11 2011
|
> In my case the original .pdf file is elsewhere, I've no need to have duplicates scatted in various logbooks, and
> while ideally
that would also be true of the thumbnail, it is fair enough for this to be stored in each logbook
> where it is required. This removes
the issue of how to have an attachment in a different logbook (other than by
> links, which would get rather tiresome to have to keep making).
>
> |
|
Re: Attachments (again), posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Aug 31 15:13:02 2011
|
Andreas Luedeke wrote:
> In my case the original .pdf file is elsewhere, I've no need to have duplicates scatted in various |
Re: Attachments (again), posted by David Pilgram on Wed Aug 31 15:20:48 2011
|
Hi Andreas,
>Of course the attachment has to be in the public logbook and the link in the hidden one.
|
|
Re: Attachments (again), posted by David Pilgram on Wed Aug 31 15:29:32 2011
|
Hi Stefan,
>Sure, but that works only from a hidden logbook into a public one, not the other way, but I think this is what
|
|
Re: Attachments (again), posted by Andreas Luedeke on Tue Sep 6 12:00:13 2011
|
> I wondered if there had been some flag for the config file whereby the original file for attachment was
> processed by ImageMagick, but not stored, only the .png file(s) stored - or rather, some other way that achieved
> the same end. as there is no such flag at present.
|
|
Re: Attachments (again), posted by David Pilgram on Tue Sep 6 12:39:39 2011
|
> > I wondered if there had been some flag for the config file whereby the original file for attachment was
> > processed by ImageMagick, but not stored, only the .png file(s) stored - or rather, some other way that achieved
> > the same end. as there is no such flag at present.
|
|
Re: Attachments, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Feb 12 16:54:27 2009
|
Steve Williamson wrote:
|
|
Re: Attachments, posted by Steve Williamson on Tue Feb 17 12:28:19 2009
|
Stefan Ritt wrote:
|