On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 12:50 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Unless what he's implemented is bad why not just comit anyway until you  
> get around to doing it better/diffeently?

I rejected the patch for several reasons, all of them technical:

(1) It adds a label for a potentially long string without taking any
measure to avoid that the dialog gets too wide due to that.

(2) It mixes filenames with strings displayed in the GUI. Filenames can
be of a different encoding and therefore need special treatment. In
particular you must not call g_path_get_dirname() on the result of

(3) Showing a directory name does only work for local files, it breaks
for remote files.

> Well it's true it does not seem to do much so it may be best no to build  
> it if it's been pushed to a future release. Still committing the name  
> change would not be a bad move since David has coded it.

Committing that change would have introduced a string change. We are
tentatively string frozen so we will avoid any string changes that are
not absolutely needed.

The Image Properties dialog only exists because the metadata plug-in is
not yet ready for prime time. As soon as the plug-in is considered
complete and stable, we won't need the core dialog any longer and the
two dialogs can be merged into a single one.

> Maybe you dont realise how frustrating and demoralising it is to put in  
> time to come up with improvements, code and submit patchs only to see them  
> bounced.

Sorry, but I couldn't accept the patches for the reasons given above.
And now I have even put more time into this than it has taken David to
come up with the patches in the first place.

As a general rule, please ask before you write a patch.


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to