On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 10:51:49PM +0200, Francois du Toit wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:57:45 -0500
> "Tim E. Jedlicka - wrk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sven> One is the user point of view: a cluttered preferences
> > Sven> dialog makes it very hard to locate the option you are
> > Sven> looking for.
> > Is a compromise possible? Looking at how firefox handles this,
> > there are menu based preferences, and then there are "customizations" via
> > about:config. about:config is even somewhat searchable/filter-able. If
> > something like this was implemented then gimp could "vouch"/test the menu
> > options, but if you invoke a "customization" then Your Kilometage May Vary.
> I wanted to suggest something similar. To not make gimp more configurable just
> because there's no space in the user interface seems silly to me. Make the
> feature configurable so the user can use gimp the way he/she wants to. If it
> clutters up the user interface then stick it in a config file where it won't
> bother anyone who doesn't want to change it.
It's ironic that Firefox's about:config is brought up as an example,
since there are several config parameters that simply don't work,
because the developers didn't notice it broke due to other changes being
So there is a maintenance cost associated adding configuration options
which needs to be evaluated. I'm not passing judgement here on the
specific option in question, I'm just saying that just making it config
file option "won't bother anyone" is an oversimplification of the issue.
Gimp-user mailing list