> I strongly disagree. It is a lot more convenient to pick a > brush of the right size from a list of brushes than to > always scale the brush.
I guess we have drastically different usages of brushes though. I NEVER use a "brush of exactly 17 pixels". In fact, a brush of "exactly 17 pixels" is pretty much useless to me. Most people go by a visual cue instead of specific values, and you can't see the exact size of the brushes in the list in the first place. > Also we simply can't remove the standard brushes > because that would > break lots of scripts. As long as there's no way to > resize brushes from > scripts, we have to keep the standard brushes with their > names. This is a whole different reason though. > > The advantage of a good default is a good first-time > impression, > > and offering greater out-of-the-box functionality to > those who > > don't know better. > > Sure, that's why we keep asking for someone to improve > the collection of default brushes collection in GIMP > for some years now. So far there hasn't been much interest. > We also don't have a maintainer for the gimp-data-extras package. It's not going to help if you oppose every attempt to help instead of welcoming at least a step in the right direction. Goodbye. I'm making my own ideal distribution and replacing the default one with it with every new install. _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer