The current protection mechanism for closing images is insufficient as it
doesn't
differentiate between 'saved' and 'exported'.
Symptom 1:
exporting to .png requires clicking a nag-screen
Sympton 2:
closing a multi-layered image which has been exported before
doesn't give a warning about
Solution:
1) the export warning for flat file formats should be optional ('do not
show this dialog again')
2) closing images, which have not been saved to
.xcf, should trigger a warning ('you have already exported this image to
.png, but you will loose all your layering/path information if
Alexia Death writes:
I'm going to echo my support for this. The nags on saves are
counterproductive.
And often they're not even right -- e.g. The image has
transparency, flatten? shows up on anything with an alpha
channel even if every pixel is fully opaque. All those dialogs
do is train the
On Saturday 07 June 2008 20:01:17 Akkana Peck wrote:
Alexia Death writes:
I'm going to echo my support for this. The nags on saves are
counterproductive.
And often they're not even right -- e.g. The image has
transparency, flatten? shows up on anything with an alpha
channel even if every
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Alexia Death [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[..]
Exactly... Witch has bitten me in the ass a few times...
That evil witch has bitten me a few times as well - even with the
pentagram drawn under my workstation ;)
Chris
___
Alexia Death wrote:
How about having a separate save option for that in the menu?
There are several feature requests about a changed export behavior:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75328
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75459
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164709
On Saturday 07 June 2008 21:47:06 Michael Schumacher wrote:
There are several feature requests about a changed export behavior:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75328
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75459
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164709
It has also been
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 19:46:24 +0200, Alexia Death [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Saturday 07 June 2008 20:01:17 Akkana Peck wrote:
Alexia Death writes:
I'm going to echo my support for this. The nags on saves are
counterproductive.
And often they're not even right -- e.g. The image has
This is a planning idea for new PaintCore for GIMP 2.8 or beyond.
1: The Why?.
Current paint core is just not flexible enough and migration to GEGL based
paint core is planned anyway. So why not do the best possible paint core
since we are redoing it anyway?
2: What is the goal?
In general:
Hi Alexia,
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 5:52 AM, Alexia Death [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a planning idea for new PaintCore for GIMP 2.8 or beyond.
[...]
* support a dynamic selection of arbitrary purely calculated axis
(random, iterator, sin, cos, sawtooth, box);
A 'Dynamic selection'?
10 matches
Mail list logo
