Hi,
On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 00:23 +, William Skaggs wrote:
> No! The way I did it was broken. But the whole process is broken. It
> is impossible to fix the interface if every tiny change can be vetoed
> by any random person. The question is, how to find a process that
> actually allows cha
Michael Schumacher wrote:
> And you do feel that the way to do this is to just commit things, and
> everyone else has to keep up with the changes without knowing what
> others are to be expected, and if something isn't right, we'll just have
> to revert it?
No! The way I did it was broken. But
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 20:51 +, William Skaggs wrote:
> > You have a point here. But you also need to look at the costs of
> > renaming a menu item. The documentation needs to change and
> > users need to learn the new name. With the amount of plug-ins that
> > we have it is rather diffi
William Skaggs wrote:
> So I have a pretty coherent vision of which filters are useful
> for which tasks, and what sort of interface a user needs in
> order to make use of them. I feel that, given a free hand,
> I would be able very rapidly to turn GIMP's filter collection
> into something that t
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 20:21 +, William Skaggs wrote:
> As I tried to explain, Wrap is not useful with edge detection.
> It is very useful with blurring, because it makes opposite
> edges look similar. With edge detection, all it does is to
> cause an edge to be drawn at the border of the
Sven wrote:
> You have a point here. But you also need to look at the costs of
> renaming a menu item. The documentation needs to change and
> users need to learn the new name. With the amount of plug-ins that
> we have it is rather difficult to keep track of changes so IMO we should
> try to a
From: Csar Rolln [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Please, don't remove the Wrap and Smear options,
> because it are useful (tileable patterns is a example).
> Removing the functionality of GIMP isn't usability.
As I tried to explain, Wrap is not useful with edge detection.
It is very useful with blurring, bec
> 4) Removed the "wrap-style" radio buttons from the
interface [...]
>
> This was a little bit controversial. Let me add
that as far as I can
> see, it was a mistake to create these options in the
first place. The
> idea behind the Wrap option was to let a user make
tileable patterns,
> but it w
On Dec 17, 2007 10:32 AM, Sven Neumann wrote:
> As you already noted, this plug-in does not have much use for the casual
> user.
Quite in opposite. Edge detection is one of the steps to make sky not
look pale on photos ;-)
Alexandre
___
Gimp-developer
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 00:12 +, William Skaggs wrote:
> > 1) Changed the menu entry from "Edge" to "Sharp Edges". Having
> > an entry called "Edge" in the "Edge-detect" category is silly, and
> > the thing that distinguishes this plugin is that it detects edges
> > between neighboring pix
William Skaggs wrote:
> 2) Added an "invert" control, so that you can see the edges as dark
>lines on a light background. Without this, the preview is almost
>useless. I did some voodoo to make "invert" the default for
>interactive use, but not to change the result when "edge" is call
Okay, that provoked a lot of controversy on #gimp. Let me follow
up here because it's easier to say things in a coherent way.
> 1) Changed the menu entry from "Edge" to "Sharp Edges". Having
> an entry called "Edge" in the "Edge-detect" category is silly, and
> the thing that distinguishes this
I've made a few tweaks to the "Edge" plug-in in the development branch,
in order to make it easier to use and understand, which I would like to
explain.
1) Changed the menu entry from "Edge" to "Sharp Edges". Having an
entry called "Edge" in the "Edge-detect" category is silly, and the
th
13 matches
Mail list logo
