Martin Nordholts wrote:
> If we define a tip shape to be a dump bitmap/vector graphics, then it 
> can be problematic (in terms of software maintainability and cleanness 
> in design) to also read dynamics data from tip shape data files.
> Everything depends on how we define the concepts.

I think this is the main problem.
In my opinion the "brush" should either:

- Be *only* the tip shape and nothing else (leaving dynamics, brush 
settings, etc, to tool options, and therefore, tool presets).

- Include most, if not all, tool and brush options/settings, define the 
tip shape, its behavior, etc, like I proposed a few weeks ago. Brush 
presets would work as "tool presets".

Right now we have an unintuitive hybrid: some settings are defined by 
tool settings, some by brush settings.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to