On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd vote for the following solution: Completely get rid of the interactive
> resizing (since it obviously can't be fixed to work correctly) and offer
> two alternative layouts (as described above) which are switchable from the
> preferences dialog. The horizontal layout would have a Help menu and probably
> even a Dialogs menu, while the vertical layout would add these as entries to
> the File menu (or probably Xtns for the Help menu).
Sorry, but I disagree. IMHO, there are more than two useful layouts.
Maybe I am sick or strange or something, but actually I use different
layouts for the toolbox on different computers, depending mostly on
the screen size and window manager used.
Here are the layouts that I found useful:
* 86 x 376 3 columns of icons, selectors at the bottom. "Traditional"
* 58 x 516 2 columns of icons, selectors at the bottom. A bit narrower
and taller than the default layout. The selection tools are
nicely sorted but it would look better without the last
three icons (odd number).
* 30 x 880 1 column of icons, selectors at the bottom. Everything on
a single column, like some well-known office toolbar. This
fits very nicely on the side of a Sun screen (1152x900) and
leaves a lot of desktop space for large images. The pattern
selector does not fit, but I can live without it since I can
open the dialog from the menu when I need it (not often).
* 170 x 262 6 columns of icons, selectors at the bottom. Similar to the
old Gimp 0.54. All selection tools are on one row. As with
all other layouts, it would even be nicer without the last
three icons (170 x 234) and if the two selectors could be
side-by-side (approx. 170 x 182 which would be almost square)
Unfortunately, this layout is broken for the moment (1.1.16)
because the selectors insist on going to the right. Why?
* 289 x 68 3 columns of icons, selectors to the right. Current default.
It wastes a bit more space than the previous one.
* 516 x 81 2 rows of icons, selectors to the right. Useful if you like
to have the toolbox near the top or bottom of the screen.
* 880 x 53 1 row of icons, selectors to the right. Very handy if you
have configured your window manager to display the toolbox
without window title. The gradient selector does not fit,
I did not like the layouts in which one selector was on the right and
the other one at the bottom, because this wastes too much space.
Please try to resize your Gimp toolbox to each of the sizes mentioned
above (that was for 1.1.16), so that you can get an idea of their
usefulness. I think that all of them can be useful, depending on how
you work. The "traditional" layout is a good compromise in most cases
(much better than the current default). But when I work with a single
large image, I tend to prefer the "thin" layouts (everything on 1 or 2
rows or columns) and when I work with multiple small images, I prefer
the "square" layouts (6 columns) because it is easier to locate the
toolbox when multiple windows overlap. Choosing a vertical or
horizontal layout is a matter of taste, but also depends on the window
manager you are using (the size of the title bar and decoration