[Gimp-developer] [PLUGIN] Gallery Maker full reviewed
Ok, the GalleryMaker plug-in (www.dtlord.com/gallery) has been full-reviewed. Many thanks to all who helped me. If you still find any bug, don't hesitate to contact me. btw, I saw a plug-in registry in Gimp Homepage ; is it mandatory to register my plugin in order to reach Gimp core application ? Regards, Fabian www.dtlord.com/linux -- Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [PLUGIN] Gallery Maker full reviewed
Hi, Fabian Frédérick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: btw, I saw a plug-in registry in Gimp Homepage ; is it mandatory to register my plugin in order to reach Gimp core application ? registering your plug-in is a very good idea indeed since it allows other users to find it. Regarding the question to include it with core Gimp: As already discussed here several times, the plan is to distribute less plug-ins with the Gimp core package instead of adding new ones. Unfortunately we have not yet managed to find a suitable system to distribute plug-ins outside the core package. I'd like to bring up this discussion again now since I would like the new system to be in place for the upcoming 1.3.0 developers release if possible. The best plan we have come up with so far is to include only very few basic plug-ins with the core Gimp and add a number of extra plug-in packages that bundle plug-ins for special purposes. A few extra-large plug-ins could even be distributed as stand-alone packages. However this has to be discussed further... Salut, Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Gallery maker ...
On 18 May 2001, at 16:16, Raphael Quinet wrote: On Fri, 18 May 2001, Branko Collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] My question is: when is a reworking of a script good enough to be included in the distribution? Is there some kind of policy for this? Well, if you add some features that can generally be considered useful and you do not remove existing features (breaking APIs), then you should definitely submit a patch so that the updated script can be included in a future release of the Gimp. Of course it is debatable as to what can generally be considered useful, but then I figure I can let you guys (and gals) decide... An added problem may be that the original author (Federico Mena Quintero) copyrighted the script without any license. Does that mean it is automatically GPL'ed, because the script is part of the standard GIMP distribution? I do not know if the law works that way. As you can see, I worked with IF statements rather than the Scheme version of a CASE statement, because I could not get the latter to work. The use of the changes: achieving a more realistic interlace effect. By giving brightness a negative value, you can get the effect of the scanline 'slowly' fading to darkness. Here's an example of that effect: http://www.planetarion.com. To do: graying out the brightness/contrast value if Type != Brightness and Type != Contrast. Can anyone tell me how to do this? Following is the unified diff of erase-rows.scm and my version of that script. I changed a lot, but the script is not that long. --- scripts\old-erase-rows.scm Mon Dec 25 20:01:50 2000 +++ _gimp1.2.Branko Collin\scripts\erase-rows.scm Sat May 19 18:00:26 2001 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -(define (script-fu-erase-rows img drawable orientation which type) +(define (script-fu-erase-rows img drawable orientation which type rwidth bcvalue) (let* ((width (car (gimp-drawable-width drawable))) (height (car (gimp-drawable-height drawable (gimp-undo-push-group-start img) @@ -6,12 +6,13 @@ (if ( i max) (begin (if (= orientation 0) - (gimp-rect-select img 0 i width 1 REPLACE FALSE 0) - (gimp-rect-select img i 0 1 height REPLACE FALSE 0)) - (if (= type 0) - (gimp-edit-clear drawable) - (gimp-edit-fill drawable BG-IMAGE-FILL)) - (loop (+ i 2) max)) + (gimp-rect-select img 0 i width rwidth REPLACE FALSE 0) + (gimp-rect-select img i 0 rwidth height REPLACE FALSE +0)) + (if (= type 0) (gimp-edit-clear drawable)) + (if (= type 1) (gimp-edit-fill drawable BG-IMAGE-FILL)) + (if (= type 2) (gimp-brightness-contrast drawable bcvalue +0)) + (if (= type 3) (gimp-brightness-contrast drawable 0 +bcvalue)) + (loop (+ i (* 2 rwidth)) max)) (loop (if (= which 0) 0 1) @@ -23,15 +24,18 @@ (gimp-displays-flush))) (script-fu-register script-fu-erase-rows - _Image/Script-Fu/Alchemy/Erase every other Row... - Erase every other row/column with the background color - Federico Mena Quintero - Federico Mena Quintero - June 1997 + _Image/Script-Fu/Alchemy/Draw Rows or Cols... + Draw rows/columns in background color or by adjusting brightness/contrast. + Federico Mena Quintero/Branko Collin + Federico Mena Quintero/Branko Collin + June 1997/May 2001 RGB* GRAY* INDEXED* SF-IMAGE Image 0 SF-DRAWABLE Drawable 0 SF-OPTION _Rows/Cols '(_Rows _Columns) SF-OPTION _Even/Odd '(_Even _Odd) - SF-OPTION _Erase/Fill '(_Erase _Fill with BG)) + SF-OPTION _Type '(_Erase _Fill with BG _Brightness _Contrast) + SF-ADJUSTMENT _Width of Row/Col '(1 1 8 1 10 0 1) + SF-ADJUSTMENT _Value of Brightn./Contr. '(0 -127 127 1 10 0 1)) + -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [PLUGIN] Gallery Maker full reviewed
Regarding the question to include it with core Gimp: As already discussed here several times, the plan is to distribute less plug-ins with the Gimp core package instead of adding new ones. IMHO, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the user needs and MEDIA growth.(Imagine there'll be _only_ DVD distro by 2002 or so). What's the problem if Gimp comes with some more useful scripts ? .btw, I don't think a lot of user will give a lot of time to download both untested unofficial plug-ins they could find in a rock-solid core appl. If Gimp is said so powerful it's just because it comes with an interesting panel of _features_ others don't give. The only thing I'm worrying about in plugin supply is the _physical_ layering in menus.Who cares it's an executable or a Perl script which does the stuffAll has to be presented in a transparent way... The best plan we have come up with so far is to include only very few basic plug-ins with the core Gimp and add a number of extra plug-in packages that bundle plug-ins for special purposes. A few extra-large plug-ins could even be distributed as stand-alone packages. However this has to be discussed further... That direction requires Gimp to enhance its policy (e.g. don't crush when a plug-in goes to hell). Regards, Fabian -- Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [PLUGIN] Gallery Maker full reviewed
On 19 May 2001, at 16:29, Sven Neumann wrote: Regarding the question to include it with core Gimp: As already discussed here several times, the plan is to distribute less plug-ins with the Gimp core package instead of adding new ones. Have you got a link to some of these discussions? I could not find them in the archive. The only thing I could find was a mention of a plug-in page at Source Forge: http://www.mail-archive.com/gimp- [EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01150.html http://gimp-plug-ins.sourceforge.net/ -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: [PLUGIN] Gallery Maker full reviewed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2001-05-20 at 0133.49 +0200): Regarding the question to include it with core Gimp: As already discussed here several times, the plan is to distribute less plug-ins with the Gimp core package instead of adding new ones. Have you got a link to some of these discussions? I could not find them in the archive. The only thing I could find was a mention of a plug-in page at Source Forge: People discuss things in many ways, not just mail lists. Things like real meets, IRC and private mail are nice examples, and Gimp staff is not different. They had a meet past year IIRC, you can read them talk in the #gimp channel about ideas and you can mail them privately if needed. You can use those methods or wait until somebody writes a note to the list or in a webpage. You can also use those methods, and then write the note yourself. ;P GSR ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Print plugin
I expect that we're going to go alpha with 4.2 in the relatively near future, and then release some time this summer. What should we do about syncing up? -- Robert Krawitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/ Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project lead for Gimp Print/stp -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works. --Eric Crampton ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [PLUGIN] Gallery Maker full reviewed
Fabian Frédérick wrote: Sven Neumann wrote: Regarding the question to include it with core Gimp: As already discussed here several times, the plan is to distribute less plug-ins with the Gimp core package instead of adding new ones. IMHO, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the user needs and MEDIA growth.(Imagine there'll be _only_ DVD distro by 2002 or so). What's the problem if Gimp comes with some more useful scripts ? snipped PLUGIN_MAINTAINERS was introduced into the distribution on Tuesday, January 04, 2000; in the five hundred and two days since that date, of the 162 core plugins cited in that file, 52 have maintainers. By this metric, only thirty-two percent of the core plug-ins are supported. Did someone suggest adding plug-ins to the core distribution? It appears that on this date, there are not sufficient numbers in the ranks of Gimp contributors to support the plug-ins that already distribute with the core; this alone, I think, lends necessary and sufficient weight to the idea that the number of plug-ins that fall in the arena of core support ought to be that minimum to make a functional, but not full-featured core package. This still begs the question of how the delta of plug-ins between the functional and full featured gimp are to be deployed, (and maintained!). There has not been a mailing-list discussion on this issue in almost a year; likely there are many newer readers who are not even aware of the problem of plug-in support and maintenance. Be good, be well Garry ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
