On 08/03/2010 10:04 PM, Charlie De wrote:

> [...] For that reason I've previously proposed what to me
> seems to be the cheapest solution - offer the fix as a compile option in an
> incremental bug release in the stable branch.

But if someone compiles from source anyway, it's probably easier to just 
apply the patch (well maybe not this one, but once it's halfway done).

Martin made a remark on bugzilla: "Don't change the name of the legacy 
enums, that just complicates the patch".

While I'd spontaneously agree with that, I am only now starting to 
realize what a bad decision it was, along with reordering them which is 
much worse still:
I hadn't considered plug-ins at all.
'neutralizing' the enums for XCF is pretty pointless if all existing 
plug-ins break.
Of course we could do it for plug-ins, as well, but then it should be 
*all* enums... ouch.

So it's back to original order and naming for the legacy enums. But I'm 
still torn on XCF. I'd really dislike going back to writing enums to 
files -- but objectively, there isn't much of a point to keep it up.


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to