On Thursday 11 January 2007 13:46, Steve Thompson wrote: > I guess that about says it all, right? We listen to our users, but > adjustment layers is a pointless discussion.
You're not listening. It's pointless because adjustment layer support is already in the roadmap. Need heard. Need understood. Approach to resolving need defined. Work toward that end in progress. What more do you want? You want Sven and company to drop everything else they're doing in order to implement adjustment layers RIGHT NOW, integrating this new feature into an architecture that will be immediately abandoned and replaced as soon as 2.4 is out the door? Doing what you seem to want will: 1. Delay 2.4 2. Delay the next, GEGL-based version which will... 3. Delay > 8bpc support 4. Delay CMYK support 5. Delay a whole raft of other desireable features All so that you can have adjustment layers just a bit sooner -- maybe. Depending on the complexity of implementing adjustment layers in the current engine, it's entirely possible that you'll get your feature *LATER* than if you wait for the GEGL-based version!!! Sheesh. Even as a corporate developer, I'd get pissed off at a manager who tried to push that kind of stupid decision on me. Why would anyone be surprised that VOLUNTEER developers would get annoyed at similar pressure from people that have no authority over them, and are unwilling to help out? </rant> Shawn. _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user