>Personally, I'd prefer that the developers work on enhancing the tool >rather than making the tool look pretty (ier). > >I'd suggest that if someone likes the idea of skins, they take up that >project and do it. Then get it into the code. >
I was actally not suggesting that the primary developers should take up their time making the Gimp look shiny; just that it be made possible / documented on how to manipulate the arrangement and appearance of the UI with external files, and a dialog to facilitate switching between arrangements (Or, for starters, a command-line option or some such). --change of replied-to emails-- > >That is a whole lot of maintainance work, way more than you might think. >I would hope optimistically that things could be adjusted to work well for >all kinds of users and I think it would be better to make efforts to >improve the defaults first (but developers will spend time on whatever >they are most interested in). > >If it is possible to make these kinds of changes and enough people are >interested it will probably happen (like it just did) so it makes sense to >try and allow it (and do so in a way that can be maintained) rather than >telling people to fork if they do not like the user interface. Now, I readily admit that I haven't really looked into what this would take, and whether or not this is effectively already possible. I did a little bit of looking a while back, but not much. I was mostly thinking of "Skinning" as a way to modularize the Gimp proper apart from alternate UI arrangements; that way, people who want to make it shiny can play with those parts, and what they make can take updates to the underlying code without patching/recompile of their skins. _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
