Re: [Gimp-developer] (no subject) plus dockables
O Peter, Where Art Thou? This is getting nasty quickly. On 28.08.2010 20:13, Sven Neumann wrote: On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 07:32 +0200, Martin Nordholts wrote: If I want a colour , I should find it on the colour menu . If I want to select layers I should fine the necessary interface elements on the layer menu. Sounds reasonable. We could duplicate the menu items from the Dockables menu that raise/create those dialogs in the places where they belong. So we would have Layers dialog in the Image/Layers menu and the like. That's as simple as editing the XML files in the menus sub-directory. Perhaps someone wants to come up with a patch... I don't think we should duplicate any menu items. Having things in two places tends to cause unnecessary confusion. A user will have to answer questions like Why is this menu item in two places? Is it the same menu item? Does it do the same thing? Which one should I use now? Having just one place to do things avoids such ambiguity and mental friction. We do that for a few menu items already and I don't think it has ever caused any problems. Some examples are (and there are many more): Edit-Undo History View-Navigation Window Select-Selection Editor Colors-Info-Histogram Actually I think it's just an oversight that the Layers dialog is missing from the Layers menu. IMO all dialogs should be accessible from the menus where they belong to functionally. The Dockables menu is just a place to list all the available dialogs. It should be secondary. Another thing to note is that the 'Add Tab' entry from the dockable context menu provides a list of available dockables as well. I think i can explain why this additional option for dockable creation does not create much mental friction: When i'm browsing the 'Layer' menu, i'm thinking of what can be done with layers. Here is the place to discover the layers dialog -- i can find it here even if i do not have prior knowledge that a layers dialog exists at all. On the other hand, when adding a tab to an existing docbook using the 'Add Tab' menu, i'm configuring my workspace to better suit the task at hand -- that's a different kind of process than browsing for layer functionality. Windows-Dockable Dialogs is literally in the middle of these two choices. Perhaps we can weasel out by proclaiming that this isn't a 'menu' but just a list of available dialogs and thus no decision has to be made about which menu to use... That is, paraphrasing what Sven said. Also, interesting to note how differently the word 'dialog' gets perceived. bye, yahvuu ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Patch shortening GIMP startup time
2010/9/1 Kevin Cozens ke...@ve3syb.ca Łukasz Czerwiński wrote: I have made several optimizations in loading script-fu extension making the loading process a bit faster. Thank you for the patches. They will be reviewed son. I can't look at them for another day or two as I'm finishing up some changes on another project. I would ask that you update the patches to address the issues raised by Sven and then post a bug report against Script-Fu. Attach the patches to the report instead of pasting them in the body of the report. The bug report will prevent this issue from getting lost in my e-mail's mail folders. It would help if you could also send some additional information about the patches to this mailing list to explain the changes. I noticed in the before and after graphics that your modified version doesn't go through the usual steps to locate the script files which leaves me wondering how it finds what scripts need to be loaded. It seems that you and Sven asked me to make two different actions and it's useless to do both. Sven asked me to commit my patch into git, you have told me to create a bug and add a patch there as an attachment. Whose commands should I obey? :] I'm trying to guess what's the procedure for making changes in code and get them approved by some more experience developers. Could you provide me such information? Maybe there should be a page on the website saying what should be done step by step to patch GIMP and get the patch approved. I'm thinking of a small guide for newbie developers. By now I have submitted a bug report for Script-fu in GIMP, but didn't commit my changes into git. Sven, Kevin, should I do it? As for your request for additional information, a description of my change I have written in a description of my bug report: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=628509 Looking forward to your answer, Łukasz Czerwiński ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Patch shortening GIMP startup time
Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:53:34 +0200 Von: Łukasz Czerwiński lc277...@students.mimuw.edu.pl It seems that you and Sven asked me to make two different actions and it's useless to do both. Sven asked me to commit my patch into git, you have told me to create a bug and add a patch there as an attachment. Whose commands should I obey? :] Both, they aren't conflicting. You probably get the GIMP source code from Git already, as described here: http://live.gnome.org/Git/Developers Contributing patches is described there as well: http://live.gnome.org/Git/Developers#Contributing_patches HTH, Michael -- GMX DSL SOMMER-SPECIAL: Surf Phone Flat 16.000 für nur 19,99 euro;/mtl.!* http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Getting new layer modes fit for inclusion
On 09/01/2010 12:12 PM, Øyvind Kolås wrote: On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Martin Nordholtsense...@gmail.com wrote: My point was that we either decide that GEGL should render just like legacy, in which case we would need to implement both kinds of color layer modes in GEGL, or we decide that some incompatibilities are OK, in which case we don't need the legacy color modes in GIMP. -- Right now, the Overlay layer mode actually renders differently in GEGL than in legacy, so we would also have to introduce an (obsolete) version of Overlay. (The legacy Overlay is exactly identical to legacy Soft Light, but the GEGL Overlay is different from the GEGL Soft Light.) GEGL will do compositing in linear light RGB, while GIMP will do compositing in sRGB Yes you're right, and personally I think this is fine, as long as we do full and proper color management in GIMP 3.0. / Martin -- My GIMP Blog: http://www.chromecode.com/ Automatic tab style and removed tab title bar ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Patch shortening GIMP startup time
Łukasz Czerwiński wrote: It seems that you and Sven asked me to make two different actions and it's useless to do both. In the e-mail messages I saw you being told of some issues with the patch but not a one for you to the changes to git. The bug report ensures this issue and the patches won't get lost or forgotten. I'm trying to guess what's the procedure for making changes in code and get them approved by some more experience developers. You have been doing the right things. You started by sending an e-mail to the GIMP developer mailing list. Even better, you provided a set of patches. As I am the main person who deals with issues related to the Script-Fu component of GIMP, Sven made sure I was aware of the mail you sent and asked me to follow up on it. If you want to discuss things further, you can find myself, Sven, and other GIMP developers on the #gimp channel on IRC. For more information about GIMP related IRC channels go to http://www.gimp.org/irc.html. As for your request for additional information, a description of my change I have written in a description of my bug report: Thank you. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
