Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
I don't see why providing links to recomended binaries on the front page would put any more responsibility on us. We already direct users to recomendeded binaries, and as long as we continue to be clear that we don't build those binaries ourselves, why should we not make it easier to reach those? The content of a website should be organized in such a way that the most usable information should be the most reachable, and I am pretty confident that most visitors on gimp.org looks for binaries, hence we should have binaries on the front page. I don't see why we would have to also host the Win32 FAQ etc because of this. Just link to those external pages. Sure, coherency is important but let's not take it to the extreme, let's focus on providing a pragmatic gimp.org. Martin Nordholts les, just link to themourselves Sven Neumann skrev: Hi, On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:29 +0100, David Marrs wrote: Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any further. We haven't really discussed and rejected this particular idea. The point here is just that the current rule is that the GIMP team only provides the source code. The creation, distribution and maintainance of binary packages has been left to other parties. The current website tries to explain this point and only gives recommendations for binary packages. In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks, then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] my plugin not works now!!
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 01:17 -0700, coolhand wrote: You would have to show us the code of your plug-in if you want us to help you. Sven Ok. http://www.nabble.com/file/7507/gimp_gdal_plugin.c gimp_gdal_plugin.c This is a plugin to load image files from the gdal library (Geospatial Data Abstraction Library). As this library loads some of common file types such as jpeg, tiff, etc, i thinked to make an alternative dialog to load from; therefore this is a general plugin, and not a load plugin. Also, when i opened images, the plugin still continue working, but when i close one of these images, the menu item gones gray and i can't use any more. This other one is a load file plugin: http://www.nabble.com/file/7508/gimp_lct_plugin.c gimp_lct_plugin.c it works fine at first time. To work it needs to be reinstalled, and then it only works once again. ¿why? for me is a mistery. Hi, the problem is that you specify GREY as image type for your open procedures. That means you can only use these procedures if your currently active image is greyscale. That's probably not what you want, just pass an empty string there (). And unrelated: For the first plug-in, there is no reason any more to have image and drawable parameters just because a procedure registers in Image, just get rid of these useless parameters too and your plug-in will continue to work just as before. ciao, --mitch ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:29:26 +0100, David Marrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was suggested on the gimp-web mailing list that we could provide direct links to binary packages for popular platforms such as Windows or Mac, based on user agent detection. The link would be provide from the home page - see http://next.gimp.org/ for a taster. I liked the proposal (presuming reliable packages for 2.4 are made available) and can provide the necessary code. Sigh! That reference to next.gimp.org should not have been mentioned outside the gimp-web mailing list. It's not a secret (anyone is free to join the gimp-web list or the discussions on IRC) but we should make sure that the new design is not discussed too early on various blogs or web sites, otherwise this would ruin the effect for the 2.4 release. So if you have visited that site and you want to comment on it, please limit your discussion to the gimp mailing lists or IRC channels, but do not spread this URL before 2.4 is released. Thanks! -Raphaël ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:20:58 +0200, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. I don't think that it would be a problem. Over the years, Jernej's installer has evolved into something that can only be described as an official package for Windows. Regarless of what we state about it, I bet that most users consider it as the GIMP for Windows. Providing a one-click download button is unlikely to cause more problems or confusion. The situation may be different for Mac users or users of other platforms, but then again if the web site statistics are still the same as when I last looked at them, then the majority of our visitors are using IE on Windows. It is reasonable to think that a fair number of these visitors are interested in getting the installer for GIMP on Windows. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. Moving the Win32 user FAQ to www.gimp.org may or may not be a good idea. I think that Jernej should state his opinion on that. Regarding gimp-app, I am not sure because we do not (or did not) get too many Mac visitors and I do not know to what extent they perceive the gimp-app package as official. This may change if the native GTK+ port evolves, but for the moment I am not sure that we even need to have a direct download button for Mac packages. -Raphaël ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:09:05 +0200 From: Martin Nordholts [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't see why providing links to recomended binaries on the front page would put any more responsibility on us. We already direct users to recomendeded binaries, and as long as we continue to be clear that we don't build those binaries ourselves, why should we not make it easier to reach those? Because whatever disclaimers etc. you use, users will see the binaries as coming from the GIMP project, and will blame you if there are any download problems or corrupted (or trojaned!) binaries. The content of a website should be organized in such a way that the most usable information should be the most reachable, and I am pretty confident that most visitors on gimp.org looks for binaries, hence we should have binaries on the front page. I don't see why we would have to also host the Win32 FAQ etc because of this. Just link to those external pages. Sure, coherency is important but let's not take it to the extreme, let's focus on providing a pragmatic gimp.org. Martin Nordholts les, just link to themourselves Sven Neumann skrev: Hi, On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:29 +0100, David Marrs wrote: Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any further. We haven't really discussed and rejected this particular idea. The point here is just that the current rule is that the GIMP team only provides the source code. The creation, distribution and maintainance of binary packages has been left to other parties. The current website tries to explain this point and only gives recommendations for binary packages. In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks, then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] my plugin not works now!!
Ok, all works now!. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/my-plugin-not-works-now%21%21-tf3472129.html#a9731510 Sent from the Gimp Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click bi nary downloads via the gimp website
On Thursday 29 March 2007 07:22, Robert L Krawitz wrote: We already direct users to recomendeded binaries, and as long as we continue to be clear that we don't build those binaries ourselves, why should we not make it easier to reach those? Because whatever disclaimers etc. you use, users will see the binaries as coming from the GIMP project, and will blame you if there are any download problems or corrupted (or trojaned!) binaries. Just then - who will they blame if a binary from gimp-win crashes? The names and e-mails for complaint may be the ones in the gimp-win page, but on the users mind, the program that failed is the GIMP. Back on the thread topic - when lecturing about the GIMP, the instructions I give for windows downloading are something like google for Gimp Windows Download. Having a download link straight from GIMP .or gmaybe could be a nice thing, but it is not the most important. There is the issue of needing to download the GTK+ installer as well - and the instructions ofr that - so it is not only linking to the GIMPwin installer from gimp.org/downloads. However - (I am reviewing now), a user trying to download the GIMP for windows now, starting from gimp.org has to go through: www.gimp.org www.gimp.org/downloads www.gimp.org/windows gimp-win.sourceforge.net/ gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html And then grab the gtk+, and gimp win binaries. And all those pages are in English only - (most people in my target audiences are not proeficient enough in English - so, just imagine all those pages are in some language you don't understand, and you will see it is rather unprobable that one would click on the correct links at each of then) Regardless of providing a direct link to the binaries, I think that a direct link from gimp.org/downloads to a page with the same instructions and links that live currently live in gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html is a must. Discussing the i18n of some or all of these pages would be OT here, but that is of concern to me as well. js -- ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
On 3/29/07, Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: And then grab the gtk+, and gimp win binaries. And all those pages are in English only - (most people in my target audiences are not proeficient enough in English - so, just imagine all those pages are in some language you don't understand, and you will see it is rather unprobable that one would click on the correct links at each of then) Which reveals another question -- whether new gimp.org is supposed to be i18n enabled (a question, not quite related to this list, so I would appreciate offlist answers). Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Denoising Plugin
I've just compiled a plugin based on a denoising program that attracted slashdot's attention a short while ago. http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/99611463/article.pl It gets very good reviews compared to Noise Ninja and other commercial products. I was wondering if it is good enough that you might be willing to include it in the standard distro? The only holdback I can see is that it is written in C++. I've got it running on SuSE 10.0 and there is a windows version available online. The author has no objections to including it. Jim ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Denoising Plugin
Jim Sabatke wrote: I've just compiled a plugin based on a denoising program that attracted slashdot's attention a short while ago. [...] Jim, there is already a GREYCstoration gimp plugin, which you can find out about by googling greycstoration gimp plugin. Is yours better? In any case, the main gimp distribution doesn't currently include anything written in C++. Best wishes, -- Bill __ __ __ __ Sent via the CNPRC Email system at primate.ucdavis.edu ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Denoising Plugin
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:50:02 -0700 From: William Skaggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jim Sabatke wrote: I've just compiled a plugin based on a denoising program that attracted slashdot's attention a short while ago. [...] Jim, there is already a GREYCstoration gimp plugin, which you can find out about by googling greycstoration gimp plugin. Is yours better? In any case, the main gimp distribution doesn't currently include anything written in C++. Greycstoration is extremely slow. If there's a faster one that does a good job (and at least with the settings I tried, greycstoration didn't do that great of a job), I'd be very interested in seeing it. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Denoising Plugin
Robert L Krawitz wrote: Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:50:02 -0700 From: William Skaggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jim Sabatke wrote: I've just compiled a plugin based on a denoising program that attracted slashdot's attention a short while ago. [...] Jim, there is already a GREYCstoration gimp plugin, which you can find out about by googling greycstoration gimp plugin. Is yours better? In any case, the main gimp distribution doesn't currently include anything written in C++. Greycstoration is extremely slow. If there's a faster one that does a good job (and at least with the settings I tried, greycstoration didn't do that great of a job), I'd be very interested in seeing it. The new version is MUCH faster and does a much better job than the old plugin. The Greycstoration's original author and the gimp plugin's original author never did see eye to eye on the plugin. You can try out the new plugin, source at: http://sound.eti.pg.gda.pl/~greg/gimp/ It's basically a windows version, but if you put CC=g++ and LDFLAGS=-lpthread in the ENV, then gimptool does it's job on my version of linux just fine (SuSE 10.0). It shows up under Filters-Enhance Jim ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Denoising Plugin
William Skaggs wrote: Jim Sabatke wrote: I've just compiled a plugin based on a denoising program that attracted slashdot's attention a short while ago. [...] Jim, there is already a GREYCstoration gimp plugin, which you can find out about by googling greycstoration gimp plugin. Is yours better? In any case, the main gimp distribution doesn't currently include anything written in C++. Best wishes, -- Bill Bill, The current gimp site Greycstoration plugin has been abandoned and wasn't that good to begin with. There has been a lot of work on the source code, plus a better gimp interface. Jim ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Denoising Plugin
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:10:03 -0500 From: Jim Sabatke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Robert L Krawitz wrote: Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:50:02 -0700 From: William Skaggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jim Sabatke wrote: I've just compiled a plugin based on a denoising program that attracted slashdot's attention a short while ago. [...] Jim, there is already a GREYCstoration gimp plugin, which you can find out about by googling greycstoration gimp plugin. Is yours better? In any case, the main gimp distribution doesn't currently include anything written in C++. Greycstoration is extremely slow. If there's a faster one that does a good job (and at least with the settings I tried, greycstoration didn't do that great of a job), I'd be very interested in seeing it. The new version is MUCH faster and does a much better job than the old plugin. The Greycstoration's original author and the gimp plugin's original author never did see eye to eye on the plugin. You can try out the new plugin, source at: http://sound.eti.pg.gda.pl/~greg/gimp/ It's basically a windows version, but if you put CC=g++ and LDFLAGS=-lpthread in the ENV, then gimptool does it's job on my version of linux just fine (SuSE 10.0). It shows up under Filters-Enhance At least at first glance, it does appear to be markedly better. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Denoising Plugin
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:31:50 +0200, Jim Sabatke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've just compiled a plugin based on a denoising program that attracted slashdot's attention a short while ago. http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/99611463/article.pl It gets very good reviews compared to Noise Ninja and other commercial products. I was wondering if it is good enough that you might be willing to include it in the standard distro? The only holdback I can see is that it is written in C++. I've got it running on SuSE 10.0 and there is a windows version available online. The author has no objections to including it. Jim _ very interesting filter. I just did a quick comparison rescaling some of thier sample images with lanczos interpolation in gimp. Generally, lanczos was inbetween cubic and the denoising filter. The latter usually produces images that are easier on the eye than both cubic and lanczos but on closer inspection this is not without a price. Denoising grossly simplifies the image in cleaning it up. The girl in hat image, res_lana.png becomes badly distorted and the result is worse than both lanczos and cubic. (This is going by thier images on the demo page). Ringing, while present, is less than gimp lanczos. However, quite a bit of detail is lost and the biggest defect seems to be constast takes a bit hit. The overall effect is pleasing and probably would be good for a lot of applications. Like any image processing it's a case of horses for courses and what defects in the result are acceptable in a specific application with a specific image. Thanks for bringing this up. A useful filter to have. gg. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
