Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-user] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Liam R E Quin]

On Fri, 2018-05-11 at 14:32 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> 
> it is available on openSUSE Tumbleweed and I have it installed.  for
> the
> small uses I have made, it loads quicker than 2.8 and appears more
> responsive.  no crashes.  some difficulty finding some actions, but
> nothing major.

Cool. The / command helps to find things.

Liam (slave ankh)


-- 
Liam Quin - web slave for https://www.fromoldbooks.org/
with fabulous vintage art and fascinating texts to read.
Click here to have the slave beaten.
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-user] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Patrick Shanahan]

* Elle Stone  [05-11-18 11:29]:
> On 05/11/2018 10:36 AM, Tom Williams wrote:
> >On 05/11/2018 07:24 AM, Elle Stone wrote:
> 
> >>I have no clue whether more people use GIMP on Windows than on Linux.
> >>But either way my questions remain:
> >>
> >>Are most of these "post release of 2.10" bug reports specific to GIMP
> >>on Windows? or do they also affect GIMP on Linux?
> >>
> >>Was there such an influx of Windows(-only?) bug reports for 2.8,
> >>compared to 2.10?
> 
> >My initial reaction to the GIMP 2.10 bugs on Windows vs Linux is:  have
> >many Linux distros started offering GIMP 2.10 as an upgrade/update?   I
> >run Mint 18.3, on my laptop, and GIMP 2.10 isn't available as an update,
> >yet.  I don't have the time to try updating GIMP manually, so I wait for
> >the distribution to update the software for me.  Now that I think about
> >it, my mom's Ubuntu 16.04 system hasn't received a GIMP 2.10 update either.
> >
> >Maybe as the distros start making GIMP 2.10 available, more Linux users
> >will use it.  I'm just thinking out loud.  :)
> 
> OK, that makes sense. Maybe a flood of bug reports from Linux users will
> come in when/as GIMP-2.10 is included in more Linux distributions.

it is available on openSUSE Tumbleweed and I have it installed.  for the
small uses I have made, it loads quicker than 2.8 and appears more
responsive.  no crashes.  some difficulty finding some actions, but
nothing major.

appears a good job was done.

-- 
(paka)Patrick Shanahan   Plainfield, Indiana, USA  @ptilopteri
http://en.opensuse.orgopenSUSE Community Memberfacebook/ptilopteri
Registered Linux User #207535@ http://linuxcounter.net
Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo   paka @ IRCnet freenode
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-user] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Elle Stone]

On 05/11/2018 10:36 AM, Tom Williams wrote:

On 05/11/2018 07:24 AM, Elle Stone wrote:



I have no clue whether more people use GIMP on Windows than on Linux.
But either way my questions remain:

Are most of these "post release of 2.10" bug reports specific to GIMP
on Windows? or do they also affect GIMP on Linux?

Was there such an influx of Windows(-only?) bug reports for 2.8,
compared to 2.10?



My initial reaction to the GIMP 2.10 bugs on Windows vs Linux is:  have
many Linux distros started offering GIMP 2.10 as an upgrade/update?   I
run Mint 18.3, on my laptop, and GIMP 2.10 isn't available as an update,
yet.  I don't have the time to try updating GIMP manually, so I wait for
the distribution to update the software for me.  Now that I think about
it, my mom's Ubuntu 16.04 system hasn't received a GIMP 2.10 update either.

Maybe as the distros start making GIMP 2.10 available, more Linux users
will use it.  I'm just thinking out loud.  :)


OK, that makes sense. Maybe a flood of bug reports from Linux users will 
come in when/as GIMP-2.10 is included in more Linux distributions.


Best,
Elle
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-user] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Elle Stone]

On 05/11/2018 10:35 AM, Kevin Payne wrote:

On 05/11/2018 09:06 AM, Elle Stone wrote:


Are some/many/most of the problems being reported for GIMP-2.10 on
Windows, only specific to Windows?

Or are these bug reports by Windows users simply bugs that weren't
detected by various people running GIMP-2.9/GIMP-2.10-rc/GIMP-2.10 on
Linux?


I'd suggest that one of the reasons is the relative lack of availability of 
executables during the 2.9 development 
phase - self compilation not 
really being an option on Windows.




That would explain a lot. Though people do manage to compile GIMP on 
Windows, it's apparently not easy to do.


Partha's 2.9/2.10 builds for Windows have been available for a long time 
(https://www.partha.com/), without giving rise to nearly so many bug 
reports as the official release of 2.10. But maybe most Windows users 
don't know about Partha's builds.


Best,
Elle
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Elle Stone]

On 05/11/2018 09:06 AM, Elle Stone wrote:

Are some/many/most of the problems being reported for GIMP-2.10 on 
Windows, only specific to Windows?


Or are these bug reports by Windows users simply bugs that weren't 
detected by various people running GIMP-2.9/GIMP-2.10-rc/GIMP-2.10 on 
Linux?


Someone sent me a private email in response to my list post, suggesting 
that more people use Windows, than use GIMP (I don't know if that person 
actually intended to send a private email or not, so I'm not quoting).


I have no clue whether more people use GIMP on Windows than on Linux. 
But either way my questions remain:


Are most of these "post release of 2.10" bug reports specific to GIMP on 
Windows? or do they also affect GIMP on Linux?


Was there such an influx of Windows(-only?) bug reports for 2.8, 
compared to 2.10?


Best regards,

--
Elle Stone
https://ninedegreesbelow.com
Color management and free/libre photography
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

[Gimp-developer] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Elle Stone]

Before the release of GIMP-2.10, it seems to me that very few bug 
reports were filed for GIMP-2.9/2.10 that were specific to Windows.


Are some/many/most of the problems being reported for GIMP-2.10 on 
Windows, only specific to Windows?


Or are these bug reports by Windows users simply bugs that weren't 
detected by various people running GIMP-2.9/GIMP-2.10-rc/GIMP-2.10 on Linux?


Context of these questions:

Well, mostly I'm just curious. A couple of years ago I subscribed to 
GIMP bug reports, so I've seen all the bugs filed for GIMP-2.9/GIMP-2.10 
for the last couple of years. And since the release of 2.10, it seems 
like almost all the new bug reports are from Windows users.


I didn't see all the bugs filed for GIMP-2.8, neither before nor after 
the initial release of GIMP-2.8. When GIMP-2.8 was released, were there 
as many problems with GIMP-2.8 on Windows, as there are with the release 
of GIMP-2.10?


Best,
Elle
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Re: [Gimp-developer] Paths, selections, and stroking

[Simon Budig]

Dov Grobgeld (dov.grobg...@gmail.com) wrote:
> My guess is that this happens is that the original ellipse is first reduced
> from a contour to a bitmap "selection", and then the edges of this bitmap
> is somehow traced.
> 
> On the other hand the result may be improved by instead of stroking the
> selection, you convert the selection to a "path" and then stroke the path.
> This approach is practically identical to the Inkscape result:
> [image: stroke-path.png]
> But why are these different? What use then is stroke selection? Shouldn't
> stroke selection use the same algorithm?

You're right: Stroking a selection means, that the stroke follows the
"marching ants" exactly, which means that there are a lot of 90° turns,
which are executed according to the line-join property. Especially with
the "miter" join style this leads to a pretty significant change in
the perceived stroke width. It is slightly better with the "round" join
style.

I've tried ages ago to address this problem, but it turns out it really
is hard. There is some discussionn of this problem in
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50730

I hope this helps,
 Simon
-- 
  si...@budig.de  http://simon.budig.de/
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

[Gimp-developer] Paths, selections, and stroking

[Dov Grobgeld]

Hi all,

There is one issue with gimp that has been bothering me for several years,
and that is that stroking selections usually generate non-equally thick
lines. To see an extreme example of this do the following:

   - Create a 64×64 image
   - Make an elliptical selection in the middle of the image of radius 16.
   - Stroke with line width 10

The result looks as follows (the result is not antialiased, even though I
chose anti aliased stroking).

[image: circle.png]
What I wanted was this (generated with inkscape):

[image: circle-inkscape.png]
My guess is that this happens is that the original ellipse is first reduced
from a contour to a bitmap "selection", and then the edges of this bitmap
is somehow traced.

On the other hand the result may be improved by instead of stroking the
selection, you convert the selection to a "path" and then stroke the path.
This approach is practically identical to the Inkscape result:
[image: stroke-path.png]
But why are these different? What use then is stroke selection? Shouldn't
stroke selection use the same algorithm?




​
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list