> That would be terrible. Users not understanding the concept would suddenly
> facing images where they can just save to JPEG while others can't, but PNG
> still enabled (because they somehow added an alpha channel), and even other
> images support XCF only (maybe because the layer is bigger than the
No, that's not what I'm suggesting. If you import a jpeg for example, do
your editing, and end up with an alpha channel somehow, the save could
still default to the .jpg (the jpeg save dialogue could display a warning
that transparency will be lost). That does not prevent the user from
requesting a .png (by specifying that extension). It also does not prevent
the user saving as an xcf either for that matter.
When closing the file, if the file is not saved as an xcf, and there is
extra data to be lost, well, the warning about it is there anyway.
I'm also okay with saying GIMP is for professionals, and just keeping it
the way it is, which is the way I use it, and like it just fine. That does
not mean I can't be open to making a few small changes for people who want
to use GIMP for basic edits without the technical stuff that I need "in the
way". Adding the above feature would not cripple my workflow, and I can see
the benefit to simpler needs of less advanced users.
> they would have three images that might look the same and seem to use the
> features but GIMP seems to treat them different for no apparent reason.
> Internal state isn't that obvious after all. I assume that would be even
> > -C
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address: email@example.com
> List membership:
> List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address: firstname.lastname@example.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list