Sven Neumann wrote:
> Note that these brushes are editable. They are just read-only because
> they are in the system folder.
I am well aware of the technical reasons. That does not change it for
the user. From user POV they are non-editable clutter that you cant even
> As soon as you copy them, they can be edited.
Why couldn't that copy be made for the user on profile creation?
> Having them read-only ensures that scripts can rely on them
> being available in their original size and shape.
If that is the intent why does the user need to see them at all? Cant
they be hidden and called "api" brushes? That would have more than one
> We need to somehow find a solution for this if we want to change the
> default brushes. Scripts probably need a way to specify the brush size
> and shape that they want to use instead of using a brush name.
Having as set of unlisted "api" brushes would be a sane way to do that.
It would also allow for 3rd party scripts that need very specific
brushes that are useless for generic use to hide them.
Gimp-developer mailing list