On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 01:48:02AM +0200, nuno alexandre wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 15:35 -0700, Carol Spears wrote:
> > the only drawback is that the gimp will not work well this way without a
> > little work on your part. meaning that the directories are not
> > available until gimp is restarted.
> > all of the tools are there to manage your resources however.
> > carol
> Ok, that sounds a lot like Windows and you are scaring me.
> If you had to restart your car every time you had to make a turn, would
> that be ok?
hmm, using new directories of brushes in which you have sorted in a way
that would meet your needs sounds like restarting your car every time
you make a turn ....
how to respond to this ....
i think a better analogy would be to fill your car with camping
equipment, go camping and then return home and then empty the car.
then, use your car to go grocery shopping, get the groceries and return
home and empty the groceries (putting them away in a logical place upon
then, use your car to transport your kids and their friends to the
soccer game. attend the game and then return with the car empty
awaiting a new task.
using the minimal tools for the task -- which operating system would
this be like? i have no idea myself, i have only used gimp on linux for
years and for some reason or other, i have no problem with the idea of
sorting gimp resources into task oriented directories.
and even with other current software that is available to me, i am still
asking the question "what is the reason you need to get a whole freaking
office suite and install it so that you can simply read a file that ends
in .doc?" oh, the origins for this application can be found on a
different operating system that needs every single freaking tool to be
loaded to do a simple task and the users cannot see any reason to work
differently or manage their own resources better.
don't ask me about windows -- i really dont understand it.
i do however appreciate your enthusiasm.
Gimp-user mailing list