>From my user perspective, I'm ok with the save / export separation.
- Save only for XCF
- Export for other formats (using the current method, guess format by
extension, or manual selection of the output format).
We users are used to save anything, despite if it's a lossy format or
not, and that's bad for our workflow. I guess it will take some time to
get used to the new method and break the habit of pressing CTRL+S to
save when we are working on a jpeg file (for instance). But in the end
it will be educative and possitive.
The right way to manage files is separating the native, loseless format
from the lossy, export file formats.
The benefit will be a reduction of accidental data loss and an
improvement in the work flow.
I'm concerned about the "save a copy" command, though. It will certainly
present a usability problem. Should it save, export, or both?
Should it be removed?
My guess is that it should not be removed, because it provides a useful
solution when working with different versions of the file.
In my oppinion, it should do the same that the save command. It means
that it will no longer export to different formats, just xcf.
Again, that will force users to adopt a better workflow (much people
uses "save a copy" for exporting to a lossy format keeping the
These changes can be quite traumatic for some users but in the long term
will benefit the usability and interface coherence of the program, so in
my honest oppinion, they have to be performed.
Gimp-developer mailing list