On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 01:16 +0200, Martin Nordholts wrote:
> > Another reason is that it is not reasonable to duplicate the system
> > resources in the folders of all users.
> How exactly is this unreasonable in 2009? Compared to the amount of
> images we can expect a user to have based on our product vision, copies
> of default resources is negligible.
I don't see how anything that was unreasonable some years ago becomes
reasonable in 2009.
> > Another reason is that it becomes a nightmare when the user updates to
> > the next GIMP version which may ship with a different set of resource
> > files.
> It's not trivial to deal with this, but it's not exactly hard either,
> whatever heuristics we come up with. Special casing treatment of so
> called system resources all over the place is a much bigger nightmare
> that dealing with a one-time migration.
Then please explain how you would deal with this. It is completely
simple and deterministic to deal with if we just allow the user to hide
system brushes, but incredibly hard if we have to deal with copies from
earlier installations. How would you fix a broken brush after it has
been copied to the user dir? How would you deal with improved/changed
tags? How do you deal with an overhaul of the system brushes?
Gimp-developer mailing list