Jason Cipriani wrote:
> Hypothetically speaking, if somebody were to sit down and try to work
> on this in the far, far future, it seems like there would only be two
> choices, both of them fairly straightforward (I'm new to gimp but
> AFAICT there's no vector-graphics layers so both choices end up with
> rasterized shapes).
> 1) It interacts with everything the same way the paint brush and
> pencil do. Draw squares, circles, etc., directly on to current layer.
> UI controls are similar to other paint programs... dragging boxes,
> 2) It behaves the same way a text layer does. Draw squares, circles,
> etc. to new "primitive shape layer" (or whatever), and they can be
> edited, scaled, rotated, whatever afterwards (this gives similar
> functionality to vector-based squares and circles and things).
Thank you for the input.
If someone sits down and writes a detailed specification* that gains
popularity on the gimp-developer mailing list, chances are quite high
that a hacker will eventually implement this. The daunting task is not
writing the implementation itself, the daunting task is figuring out all
* An example specification:
Gimp-user mailing list