Dave,
It seems like you're limiting refactoring to code re-use via
extraction to libraries.
No, I'm using the same definition that Mat refers to:
Refactoring is a disciplined technique for restructuring an existing body
of code, altering its internal structure without changing its external
Sven,
Just to clarify for others reading along, my question is not about linking
GPL and LGPL. It is about cut-and-pasting code from GPL into LGPL during
refactoring. With the benefit of hindsight years later, it seems a
maintainer doing code clean-up should find application code that would
Would like to better understand the development approach the GIMP has used
over the years to segregate code in the main app from code in libgimp. Seem
to recall seeing some app code that had moved into libgimp, but am not sure.
Do GIMP maintainers later refactor code?
Does code in app ever get
it is going to be a tough act to follow robin rowe and cinepaint.
gimp-1.0 rox!
Should I feel flattered that GIMP can't stop talking about me and CinePaint,
even when it is to spread the misconception that CinePaint is GIMP 1.0?
GIMP people have demonstrated a persistent interest
David Odin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah! Good job. Now, it would be great if you managed to do the same
for gimp-1.3.x. If all the necessary libs were ported too, we could even
consider to include this in the main tree, WDYT?
Thanks, but John-Michael Mulesa deserves the credit. He did the
GIMP on Mac OS X without X11:
http://gtk-osx.sourceforge.net/docs/gimp.html
Cheers,
Robin
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hollywood, California
www.CinePaint.org Free motion picture and still image editing software
Sven,
- We now support loading of GIMP brush format version 3. That is the
format that was introduced by the FilmGimp or CinePaint developers
(I don't know exactly when this change was made).
CinePaint has made no changes to GIMP file formats. Those modifications
predate our involvement,
The [WilberWorks] website
seems bought off and of course not much is left to be found on google
and friends. This is the best link I could find:
http://linux.rice.edu/webmap/appdescriptions/WilberWorks.html
Let's hope one of the folks involved into this can tell us more about
the goals of
Sven,
The [WilberWorks] website
seems bought off and of course not much is left to be found on google
and friends. This is the best link I could find...
Google deserves more credit.
Here's what Larry Ewing says:
http://www.isc.tamu.edu/~lewing/gimp/wilber.html
According to Wired,
At 5:10 PM -0400 7/17/03, Christopher Curtis wrote:
Just for the record ... I read the CinePaint file format, and it
doesn't even resemble XML.
Yeah, I've had that argument with Robin - and lost :(.
They are going for simple and scriptable over good design - I
think they will regret it ver
Free motion picture and still image editing software
- Original Message -
From: Robin Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: [CinePaint-dev] cpx file type
Hi. Just FYI, creating a new image format called CPX (CinePaint XML
Ernst,
Couldn't both teams try to find a common format?
In theory yes, but it seems unlikely.
Sven said today that GIMP has been (privately) discussing a new XML-based
file format for GIMP for more than three years -- which is the first I've
heard of it. However, no spec has been made
Sean,
i scratched-together a to-do list for my own GIMP wants wishes, and put
it
online, thought it might be worth sharing:
http://gimbal.paunix.org/cs/img/gimp/todo.html
... from the URL: CinePaint cannibalization whatever CinePaint [was: Film
GIMP] has for supporting additional image
Tor,
I agree that with Sven that it's wrong to call GIMP for Windows a
separate project.
What makes it seem a project is that it has a separate Web page, separate
mailing lists, and a well known project leader (you). However, as you now
say otherwise, I have updated the Web page accordingly.
Sven,
I thank Patrick and Raphaël for the apologies they posted. I think that
shows class on their part. And even though the discussion became
unnecessarily heated, everyone has learned more about the various projects.
[Robin's] list gives the wrong impressions that there are separate ports
of
Sven,
The whole point here is that instead of a collaborative effort to
provide some urgently needed information about the GIMP projects, you
just went ahead and put something into public space. It would have
been a lot better to prepare a draft and discuss it on the appropriate
lists before
Branko,
... I would like to compliment you and your team on following The Right
Way.
The Film Gimp team deserves more credit than I for what's been accomplished.
Others toiled in secret for years on Film Gimp before I joined the project
this summer. Since going public, new developers have
Raphaël,
For an up-to-date GIMP contributor list see the bottom of
http://filmgimp.sourceforge.net/people/index.html .
As you have probably seen in the recent discussions on the
gimp-developer mailing list, it is not easy to get a correct list of
As you have probably seen in the recent
Carol,
one person understood my request though :) Robin Rowe volunteered with
some scripting. i had really thought that there were enough people in
the various gimp places, clever and talented people, that this would not
be an issue. Robin volunteering was a nice spot in my day, however, i
Sven,
This document is probably still valid in a lot of points:
http://developer.gimp.org/gimp-future
Who is working on GEGL and how active is that?
Your GIMP team list at http://www.gimp.org/the_gimp_org_about.html includes
Mattis and Kimball. Have they done anything with GIMP since
Carol,
$1k would not be enough to by the beer for the people who develop The
GIMP (if i can at least add correctly).
It's true that $1k isn't generally considered a lot of money in funding a
software project, but I appreciate getting anything. Linux Fund was very
kind to give me a grant. None
Hi. Different thoughts about Film Gimp have been been expressed by Gimp
folks on the Gimp-developer list over the Thanksgiving holiday. As the Film
Gimp release manager, I've found it stimulating reading. Probably anything
interesting about that debate has already been thrashed out by others
-developer] I am a newbie, yes its true
On 30-Nov-2002, Robin Rowe wrote:
A lot of text about how film gimp is trying to be its own thing.
Well, first I would like to say film gimp should be moving to a GEGL target.
Not because film gimp is gegl, but because gegl is so damn useful. (Well
Carol,
this is such a good topic for a tutorial! i needed help to see this
stuff at first as well. i don't have time to write the tutorial, but i
got some screenshots for it when i have the time.
Hi. Thank you for the detailed response. I found that enlightening.
Cheers,
Robin
David,
I think the point is probably to do a
trawl through legacy code and see how much of it can be flushed,
if any.
I wish! Sometime later.
Although regex is available with *nix, it isn't part of Windows. My choice
is to remove it or fix the broken regex implemenation included in Film
Sven,
The regex code is used by gimp-plug-ins-query (and a similar function
in script-fu).
Yes, I can follow that from the code. I understand what regex does
generally, just not why gimp-plug-ins-query needs it.
My confusion relates to script-fu and gimp plug-ins with respect to regex.
Why
Simon,
My confusion relates to script-fu and gimp plug-ins with respect to
regex.
Why query a plug-in as a regular expression? What's the point?
To have a nice way to specify a search pattern. For thinks like a
PDB-Browser for example.
Ok, I guess I'm just not making my question clear. I
Carol,
well, i use it. honest. Robin, ever try to write a gimp plug-in?
How would regex help me write a gimp plug-in?
Cheers,
Robin
---
www.FilmGimp.org
www.LinuxMovies.org
www.OpenSourceProgrammers.org
Hi. GIMP has its own regex.c that the procedural database uses. That seems
to look up plug-ins using regexec. I'm having a little difficulty
understanding the logic of the code. Can anybody explain how regex is used
by GIMP? Why is it necessary?
Thanks!
Robin
Check https://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-film/
The berkeley.edu list is superceded by the Film Gimp list at SourceForge.
For current information about Film Gimp see filmgimp.org.
Cheers,
Robin
Film Gimp Release Manager
I was reading today in the gimp-mailinglist Your
dialog with Robert L. Krawitz on 26. september
2002. I hope You can decide for making together an
print-plugin in filmgimp.
16 bit is an issue for any serious artist. I work
with scanned 16bitimages for creating panoramas. I
need to present
Robert,
This can't really be lead from the print side. We'll have no problem
with 16-bit and CMYK (although we don't currently support 16-bit RGB),
but the GIMP side needs to spec an API for it.
Hi. Thanks for the clarification.
What I meant was print in the magazine/book publishing sense,
of the release of version 0.4 at SourceForge, Film
Gimp is starting to climb the charts. Activity rating has passed 90% and
Film Gimp is now ranked at #912 on SourceForge.
For further information see:
http://filmgimp.sourceforge.net
Cheers,
Robin Rowe
Film Gimp Release Manager
Robert,
The Gimp-print package is 16-bit capable (obviously the standard GIMP
Print plugin, which is part of the Gimp-print package, isn't). While
the only 16-bit input mode provided is CMYK, we could either add a
16-bit RGB input, or do the appropriate conversion module. Would you
folks
it seems you are mistaken. What makes you think xwd can't capture
TrueColor?
How are you using the term 24-bit visuals here (24 bit color-depth or
24 bit aligned pixels) ?
xwd: Warning. Error in XWD-color-structure (flag)
xwd: EOF encountered on reading
xwd: load_image (xwd): XWD-file
Hi. Unless I'm mistaken xwd isn't capable of capturing 24-bit visuals. It
seems almost useless on modern hardware. Is this an issue that has been
discussed here before?
Attempting to capture graphics-intense windows with xwd on x86-based XFree86
3.x or 4.x just gives a misleading error message,
36 matches
Mail list logo
