On 2009-10-21, Karl Günter Wünsch <k...@mineralien-verkauf.de> wrote:

>> Good to know; so let me refine: is there ANYTHING in the move to
>> single window which would not be achieved by
>>   a) restricting the maximal size of image window to the gap between
>>      two toolboxes; and
>>   b) making z-order changes syncronized between the main window and
>>      toolboxes?

> IMHO the move to a single image window with dockables would solve
> quite a lot of interoperability problems. For example there are
> plenty of broken window managers out there. Relying on them (WM
> developers) getting it right in the end for the GIMP is proving to
> be a long wait.

You are right, somehow I assumed that the problems of GIMP's window
management would be solved.  Taking into account the history, this was
a short-sighted assumption.

> As desktop environments go the window managers that
> work with the GIMP as intended tend OTOH to be the ones that don't
> play well with KDE for example (if you even have the choice, which
> you haven't really in KDE4). Oh and windows is a beast that isn't
> handled easily as well

BTW, I see again and again this "assumption" that the responsibility
for observed problems of GIMP may be shifted to WM's problems.  I
never could understand it.

  [Keep in mind that my experience in apps<-->WM interaction is rather
   minimal - I participated in porting Perl/Tk toolkit from X11 to
   non-X11 system, and watched the corresponding mailings lists for
   slightly more than a decade.]

Here is the picture as I understand the rare morcels I saw:

  a) on window creation, GIMP registers a few bits of information with GTK++;

  b) the exact meaning of these bits is not documented, and is known
     to vary widely;

  c) the observed results are most of the time not what one would want;

  d) the interpretation is that "it's somebody else's fault".

Obviously, I'm missing something...  I hate to ask for somebody else's
time, but I would appreciate a correction (or at least a reference to
older discussions...).

> the window manager there sucks at managing applications that consist
> of multiple single windows that don't have a proper native
> inheritance structure

I'm pretty sure that this is NOT how it happens in Windows.  AFAIK,
there is no window manager; each application is responsible to arrange
the x/y/z-order of its toplevel windows itself (there is a simple
callback interface for such arrangements).

> Besides that there are things like split layer views that I'd like
> to see - for example editing a layer mask side by side the image
> area it belongs to which IMHO are next to impossible with the
> current multi window arrangement.

Yes, this was already covered earlier in the thread...


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to