On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 1:11 AM, David Gowers wrote:
Ah, I see the problem now. There is not an 'active channel'.
There is rather an 'active drawable' (and both layers and channels are
classified as drawables). This has always been the case (but perhaps
we can show this in a clearer way? I
Hi,
the list of accepted organizations for Google summer of Code 2009 is due
tomorrow, on March 18. If you can't wait until then and need something to do
right now, then:
- visit http://socghop.appspot.com/
- click on the Sign in link in the top-right corner (you do need a Google
account for
Hello everybody,
I started to look into source code to see how much work it would be to
implement exif support for Tiff files. Currently it's very annoying that
gimp skips exif information from tiff files I created with a RAW
converter...
The main question is now what happens to the file
Hi.
On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 20:42 +0100, Sebastian Kraft wrote:
I started to look into source code to see how much work it would be to
implement exif support for Tiff files. Currently it's very annoying that
gimp skips exif information from tiff files I created with a RAW
converter...
Hi,
On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 07:26 -0400, Rob Antonishen wrote:
My opinion (which probably breaks some other intended behaviour) is
that if the active drawable is a channel, pasting should default to a
paste into that active channel
It does, of course. There's just this internal design flaw
On Dienstag, 17. März 2009 22:05:04 you wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 21:55 +0100, Sebastian Kraft wrote:
I saw in file-jpeg/jpeg.c that EXIF data simply is read into
ExifData struct via a libexif function. This only keeps EXIF from
jpeg - jpeg because there is no global ExifData to
