On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 17:22 -0400, Liam R E Quin wrote:
> So far it feels noticeably slower on mediumsized or large
> images (e.g. a 13899x8497-pixel 2400dpi grayscale scan,
> which Gimp reports as 230MBytes) but the results are
> outstandingly better.
Since the test results are looking good, I think we should commit the
changes then so that they get more testing. Does anyone disagree with
this? Otherwise I will commit the changes later this week.
Gimp-developer mailing list