The biggest first step would be to define the package xml syntax.
After that, resource types could be added. I agree that only scripts,
binaries, and python plugins would make sense to package this way.
Anything needing compiling would be out of scope.
On 5/14/10, Alexia Death <alexiade...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Akkana Peck <akk...@shallowsky.com> wrote:
>> Martin Nordholts writes:
>>> On 05/14/2010 04:13 PM, Rob Antonishen wrote:
>>> > - GIMP should be easily extensible by the average user: one
>>> > click-installation of plug-ins
>>> > [...]
>>> I agree installation of plug-ins is a pain, but I'm not aware of anyone
>>> planning to work on improving the situation.
>> Writing a file handler like Rob describes sounds easy -- if all you
>> care about is script-fu. The hard part would getting Python and C
>> plug-ins installed for users (especially Windows users) who don't
>> have Python, PyGTK or a C compiler.
> This file handler should also be able to handle all other resources
> gimp has like brushes, patterns, dynamcs, tool presets etc. Its been
> considered for a long time and If my time wasnt aready booked full I
> would look into it myself.
> Gimp-developer mailing list
Sent from my mobile device
Gimp-developer mailing list