On Wed, May 03, 2000 at 03:20:19PM +0200, Raphael Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's why I am surprised to get this problem: I double-checked that I
> had no old files in the plug-ins directory before reporting this
> strange bug.  The only files that are in the plug-in-path came from a
> fresh install of 1.1.21.  I also re-did a "make" and "make install" in
> the source tree to be sure that I was not dreaming.  :-)

Maybe you have an old gimp-perl installation? You could check the
configure output for messages to that extend (gimp-perl _tries_ to chekc
for old, incompatible installations).

> > If you give me a log-in on your machine I could fix it ;)
> home.  But if you want to come and say hello, I can give you my work
> address and a roadmap of the area.  ;-)

Uh ;-> Cool, but I guess it might be a bit *too* far for a casual visit ;)

(You could also send me the output of configure + make + make install)

> > (that were reinstalled) registered below the existing plug-ins and the
> > perl-plug-ins (which you haven't reinstalled) moved to the top.
> register again before the C plug-ins.  This appears to be new,
> although I do not know when this behavior was introduced because the

Hmm.. I just recompiled my tree (cvs last night), nuked ~/.gimp, but I
can't see the same behaviour. The scripts seem to be scattered around
quite randomly in the menus.

Sinc eI do not know wether gimp cares at all about menu-order (ot might be
that app/menus.c does something), I shouldn't comment anyway ;)

> > a seperate menu hierarchy hardly makes sense.
> The same arguments apply to Script-Fu as well, however there is still
> a separate menu hierarchy for these scripts.  But maybe a separate
> menu hierarchy is not the best solution...

This is a (IMnsHO) very nice conclusion ;) From a GUI POV, seperating
similar functionality into different menus does not make sense. It only
adds work for the user who needs to memorize that a given Filter (say,
unsharpen-warp) is not in the Filters menu, but in the Script-Fu menu. It
is also hard to explain to new users that "Add Dust" would be found in a
"Perl" submenu and not in "Filters", especially since most people do not
know what "Perl" is (or Script-Fu).

> care too much about the Perl-Fu scripts and do not even test them.  I
> am sure that I am not the only one who is worried about the overall
> consistency of the user interface, but I am surprised by the lack of
> comments about Perl-Fu

I got some comments to the extent of "perl-fu does not follow gimp-gui
standards", but I was never able to find out what that means (i.e. what
the gimp-gui standard is, and what must be changed to be more compliant).

As for consistency, most perl-scripts use the Gimp::Fu module to create
their dialog, which ensures overall consistency between 97% of all
perl-scripts. It would also make it quite easy to fix any layout problems
since the dialog code is in a central location.

After 1.2 is released, that code will change a lot, to make it possible
to add internionalized descriptions in an easier way and allow even more
customization (people do not like to write their own dialog-code, it

> Where are the "many eyeballs" that ensure that "all bugs are shallow"?

Oh, the situation has improved a lot. Quite a few gimp-developers do build
perl now, and a few even test it.

      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |

Reply via email to