On Friday 01 October 2004 10:46, Sven Neumann wrote:
> > Python bindings
> > IMO we should move pygimp out of the gimp tree into a
> > gimp-python package. That would make it easier to give it a
> > proper python-like build environment and would make it easier for
> > packagers. Yosh also had some great plans on improving pygimp.
> > Would probably be a good idea to make these improvements
> > independent of the GIMP release cycles.
> I didn't get any response whatsoever regarding Python. Makes me
> wonder if pygimp is still being maintained at all. I would really
> like to see a separate pygimp package. Can we please get this done
> for 2.2?
I've talked to Yosh about this, and he said he intend to do the move -
but he seems to be quite busy lately. Jamesh also told he could not
pick it alone.
I had been using it, but never had seen the code until this week - I
am willing to help improve and maintaining it, but I lack the time
and expertize needed to maintain a separte package all by myself.
Over the next week, I plan at least to clean up the tabs on the
remianing python files. The widgtes should be mostly "rewidgetziled",
since it is currntly using String Entries for almost everything. If
it cannot be taken apart for 2.2, that at least could be done.
I would agree with the schdules on the other itens. If there is a
delay, maybe text-transofrms could get in, but they'd need
PDB-entries as well.
Another thing IMHO is important, although marked as low priority in
bugzilla is exposing the full options for the transform tools in the
PDB - BUG 137053
( http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=137053 )
That would make whole classes of plug-ins easier to write.
Gimp-developer mailing list