On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 10:28:04PM -0500, Kevin Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you provide the subject line of any one of the messages when you
reported the problems with script-fu which you say have not been fixed
and/or a date when one of the messages was posted to the list?
The
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 03:29:53PM +0100, Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 01:52:40AM +0100, Sven Neumann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I won't unless someone tells us what he thinks is broken.
Well, telling "us" about it didn't help in the past, so why should it
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Marc Lehmann wrote:
So what? Sven obviously has not enough time to care for everything in
the Gimp. Critical bugs in Script-Fu have not been fixed for over a
year, despite a considerable number of good bug-reports.
That is VERY vague. What are these 'critical bugs'?
On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 11:30:05AM -0500, Kelly Lynn Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PLUGIN_MAINTAINERS is just a file... fatc is that bugs _do_ _not_ _get_
_fixed_, so script-fu is basically unmaintained.
You could, of course, fix them yourself. :)
As a matter of fact, I couldn't. Why do
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 20:53:30 +0100, Marc Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
As a matter of fact, I couldn't. Why do you think I could?
Anybody can do anything, with enough effort. :)
Kelly
If re-reporting the bug is so painful that you can't do it
It is so painful because I re-reported it at least three times (so many
mails are in my saent-folder, but I know I sent more that got lost during
a crash).
They are not SO critical that I have been unable to use script-fu
They are
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 01:52:40AM +0100, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I won't unless someone tells us what he thinks is broken.
Well, telling "us" about it didn't help in the past, so why should it now?
"us" should mean "the script-fu maintainer", and not me nor you.
Of course it
Marc Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 01:52:40AM +0100, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I won't unless someone tells us what he thinks is broken.
Well, telling "us" about it didn't help in the past, so why should it now?
"us" should mean "the script-fu
Marc,
don't take this too personally, it is not and was never meant to be!
I won't unless someone tells us what he thinks is broken.
Well, telling "us" about it didn't help in the past, so why should it now?
"us" should mean "the script-fu maintainer", and not me nor you.
Well, since
On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 01:41:55AM +0100, Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been using the Perl plug-in logulator for logos for quite a while, and
I ran into several
Good ;) However, it seems that scripts converted from script-fu to perl
have a large tendency to crash the gimp (yes, in ever
Hi all!
I've been using the Perl plug-in logulator for logos for quite a while, and
I ran into several
(probably) little troubles, but I am clueless on whether other people are
having them, so I would like to call for someone to share their experiences
and tests of this powerful and nice tool. I
11 matches
Mail list logo
