On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:51:05 +0200, <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann )> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 09:45:46AM +0200, Rapha√ęl Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It would be nice if preferences for plug-ins survived session
> > > changes. The way to do this might be in saving them to an rc file
> > > without providing an interface to changing them in the normal
> > I doubt that we can do this in the Right Way before the next release.
> > Saving these preferences should be done by the core through a well-
> > defined interface.
> Maybe I misunderstand the problem, but all perl-plug-ins can do that (and
> do that by default) without any extra interfaces, using parasites, for
Yes, parasites are one part of the solution.
> They do that by default, though, and there is no UI to decide when to save
> - every invocation will overwrite the per-image and global defaults for
> the next invocation.
Look at the comment that I recently added in:
IMHO, global parasites and immediate changes to the settings could
make sense for the plug-ins that are used as filters, but not for the
file plug-ins. For the file plug-ins, the settings should be a
per-image property that is not affected by the changes made to the
other images. Otherwise, it would not be possible to work on two
images at the same time and to save them with their own settings
without being afraid of having the settings of one image affecting the
It is unfortunate that the file plug-ins and the other filters are all
called "plug-ins", because they behave differently. What may make
sense for the filters (global settings) may be counter-productive for
the file plug-ins. For the filters, the settings can be considered to
be a property of the filter itself: it is reasonable to expect that
applying the same filter to a different image will use the same
settings as last time. However, this is different for the file
plug-ins: the quality settings, image comments and other
meta-information is a property of the image itself, not a property of
the filter. I expect these values to remain unchanged while I work on
an image, even if I open and save other images in the meantime.
This confusion between what is the "right" behavior for a filter and
for a file plug-in has caused some problems before. See for example:
Although I fixed that bug last year, I think that the origin of the
confusion was related to the concept of "current settings" for the
JPEG plug-in. If it was clear that the current settings for the file
plug-ins are per-image and not a global, then these problems would be
Some settings such as the image comment and other meta-data should be
available from a File->Properties dialog, not when the file is saved
(http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61499). This would make it
more obvious that they are per-image.
In fact, the other settings related to the file format could also be
dynamically registered as additional tabs in the meta-data editor.
This is a bigger change that should probably be discussed this week at
GimpCon, but the save plug-ins would not need their own dialogs and
the Export feature could also be simplified. This would reduce or
even get rid of the dialogs displayed when a file is saved (there are
several bugs related to that). In addition, each tab could contain
the buttons "Reset to defaults" and "Save as new defaults". The user
would then understand easily when the changes are saved for later and
when they are not. These buttons would only apply to the settings for
the current tab, not to the whole properties. This would provide an
easy way to replace the image comment of an existing file by whatever
you have set as the default: you would go to the tab containing the
image comment and click on "Reset to defaults" (currently, you have to
copy and paste from the Preferences). If you want to set the JPEG
quality to 95% for your image, you would go to the JPEG options tab,
change the value and click on "Save as new defaults". The metadata
dialog could pop up automatically (showing the JPEG tab) when a JPEG
file is saved. Or not, if the user does not want to be bothered by
this extra dialog. But it would be nice if the same dialog used for
File->Properties would be re-used when saving the file. Note that I
am thinking aloud here and there are plenty of details that should be
ironed out (e.g., what is done by the core, what is done by the save
plug-ins, how to add tabs dynamically to the meta-data editor), but
this could IMHO improve the way the file plug-ins work.
> For the plug-in writer this is fully transparent (if she uses Gimp::Fu).
Yes, this is nice. However, I am not sure that modifying the defaults
every time (without user confirmation) is a really good idea. I would
prefer this to be a conscious decision from the user. This affects
the gimp-perl plug-ins only, but currently two users following the
same tutorial (on the web, or printed in a book or magazine) might get
different results because of what they did previously. This would be
fine if they knew why (e.g., they had explicitely saved a default set
of options) but this is not so obvious now.
Gimp-developer mailing list