On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:08:14PM -0400, michael chang wrote:
> On 7/3/05, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i also can see what a huge effort it would be, coding-wise, to give
> > preview access to gimp scripters. it might be a case on my part of a
> > little knowledge is a bad thing, but i understand it enough to see how
> > complicated it would be.
> I'm assuming that this means it wouldn't be feisable to give a script
> the current parameters, take the returned image [unfortunately, this
> means it only works for scripts that return an image/drawable
> thingie], clip it, and display it in a window (or subset of one), in
> the settings window? [Of course, this is _HORRIBLY_ inefficient, but
> by my understanding it should be semi-feisable...]
the previews are interactive somehow. the scripts get loaded, the
parameters set and then they run.
i was talking with one of the people working on gimp-python and maybe
previews for the scripts are more reasonable than i made it sound.
> But yes, The GIMP is understaffed IIRC, and this sounds hard to
> implement. Wasn't the whole point of Open Source that if you found a
> problem, the idea was to go in and fix it yourself? [Although I can
> see why that could be a problem for end-users...]
there does seem to be more free software being provided by people who
are paid to provide it lately. it is interesting and i find it
difficult to understand.
the very weird thing about this phenomena is that the paycheck would
come with along with the access to the project. i know that at least in
my life, the amount in the paycheck had nothing to do with the love of
the work or the people i was working for and with.
Gimp-user mailing list