Currently, each image has a "dirty" flag associated with it. In
practice this is counter for the undo operations, but the users see it
as a flag. Unfortunately, this is not very flexible because it cannot
tell if the image data was modified or if only its metadata was
modified. I think that it could be improved by splitting this dirty
indicator in two (data and metadata) or maybe even three:
- image data (tiles)
- image "structure" (layer visibility, stacking order, etc.)
- other metadata (parasites such as EXIF, color profile, etc.)
This could be helpful in several cases. For example, a file save
plug-in could detect that the metadata was updated (e.g., new
description or copyright message) but the image data was not altered.
In that case, it could try to re-use the data from the original file
on disk if it is still available. This could be useful for lossy
formats such as JPEG and this is somewhat related to bug #105623.
This could also be nice for very large files if the metadata can be
rewritten without touching the other parts of the file.
I'm not sure if what I called "image structure" above should be
considered separately. This could be useful for those who liked the
old (and rather incorrect) behaviour of gimp 1.2 that did not consider
the layer visibility changes as affecting the image itself. This is
just an idea... Maybe it is better to consider only "image data" and
For additional fun, there could be another flag (e.g. "tainted" but
not "dirty") used only when the image is loaded from disk and telling
the GIMP if some minor operations have been applied to it, such as the
automatic rotation based on the EXIF metadata or the conversion from
some color profile to sRGB. This flag would reduce the need for the
"trust-dirty-flag" setting: the image would not be marked as dirty so
that the user would not be asked to save it when closing it (except if
other operations have set the dirty flag). But if the image or its
metadata is "tainted", then it would always be saved if the user wants
to save it (even if trust-dirty-flag is TRUE).
I think that such a change could improve the usability of the GIMP and
could lead to better results in some cases (avoiding recompression).
But I would like to discuss it before submitting it to Bugzilla. Any
Gimp-developer mailing list