Re: [Gimp-developer] Redo shortcut (was: Undo shortcut)
Hi, Sven Neumann wrote: Ack. IMHO the new keybinding (David changed it already) is really akward to use compared to the old one. And actually Ctrl-Shift-Z should better be left available so we can bind it to group undos later when this feature is implemented. (A group undo would allow to undo all operations of the same type found at the top of the undo stack, for example all paint strokes). Personally, I'd prefer to keep the new keybinding for the reasons already stated, and look at another keybinding for the new functionality. I don't have any ideas on what that functionality should be, but I think that using the keybinding for group-undo when on other software platformsit is redo could risk being confusing. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary, Lyon, France E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Difference between 1.2 .gih and 1.3 .gih files?
Jeff Trefftzs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I notice that I get lots of complaints about corrupt brush files when I try to load .gih files from gimp-1.2.x into 1.3.20. Can somebody please point me to the right place to discover the difference between the gimp-1.2 .gih brushes and whatever the equivalent is in gimp-1.3.20? I have a whole lot of brushes that I'd like to convert if only I knew how. The GIH plugin still is able to load these brushes. You can load them into the Gimp (as an image) and save them again. Maybe keep a backup to be sure. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] How do I get a plugin into the offical release?
David Hodson wrote: I really don't have the time to take on a maintenance job - I have too many of my own projects to finish. Plus, I don't think that the plugin registry likes me. I have some very old plugins there, but every time I try to update them I can't get access. I'm not sure the plug-in registry likes anyone :) Who *is* responsible for maintaining it? In the meantime, as Carol suggested it might be an idea to use the wiki to collect these kinds of external resources, in the absence of a registry which gets updated. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary, Lyon, France E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Difference between 1.2 .gih and 1.3 .gih files?
Jeff Trefftzs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, I notice that I get lots of complaints about corrupt brush files when I try to load .gih files from gimp-1.2.x into 1.3.20. Can somebody please point me to the right place to discover the difference between the gimp-1.2 .gih brushes and whatever the equivalent is in gimp-1.3.20? I have a whole lot of brushes that I'd like to convert if only I knew how. Hi Jeff, The GIH format has changed shortly before the 1.2 release since it used the (now obsolete) special pixmap brush file format (which has been merged with the GBR gimp brush format). Just open the failing brushes with File-Open and save them again. The plug-in is still able to read these files and will save the new format. ciao, --Mitch ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] How do I get a plugin into the offical release?
Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: According to http://registry.gimp.org/changes?max=15 the last change to a plug-in was done only a couple of days ago - so it seems the registry works at least for some people. Perhaps, but there are several things which should be possible which aren't. First, the majority of the plug-ins in the registry appear to be abandonware - 1.0 plug-ins that have never been updates to 1.2, never mind 1.3/2.0. We need a way to clean out the cruft (or at least hide it away). Second, the registry could do with a ranking system to have the most common and/or popular plug-ins appearing on the top of the lists of plug-ins. The only sorting system I've seen is alphabetically, which severely limits the usefullness of the site. Third, it is not possible to attach patches for existing plug-ins to a plug-in without being a plug-in maintainer. It would be nice if this were easier to do, perhaps with a comment system? Although I guess an inscription system makes some sense... In the meantime, as Carol suggested it might be an idea to use the wiki to collect these kinds of external resources, in the absence of a registry which gets updated. Hmmm... another duplication of effort? Why have two places to store user committed plug-ins? Wouldn't the time be better spent on say, maintaining registry.gimp.org? Sure - In the meantime was meant to be until the plug-in registry is maintained. I would still like to know who is running the site. Is Ingo still active on it? Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary, Lyon, France E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] How do I get a plugin into the offical release?
David Neary wrote: I'm not sure the plug-in registry likes anyone :) Who *is* responsible for maintaining it? Ingo is listed as the contact, and his email address is there. I did get a reply from him when I was having problems (in May this year), but we couldn't solve them. (Or maybe I lost interest.) (BTW, sorry I replied to you instead of the list.) -- David Hodson -- this night wounds time ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Difference between 1.2 .gih and 1.3 .gih files?
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 04:10, Michael Natterer wrote: Hi Jeff, The GIH format has changed shortly before the 1.2 release since it used the (now obsolete) special pixmap brush file format (which has been merged with the GBR gimp brush format). Just open the failing brushes with File-Open and save them again. The plug-in is still able to read these files and will save the new format. Thanks to Dave, Simon, and Mitch for the prompt replies. I'm converting the old brushes now. -- --Jeff Jeff Trefftzs [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.tcsn.net/trefftzsHome Page http://gug.sunsite.dk/gallery.php?artist=68 Gimp Gallery http://trefftzs.topcities.com/ Photo Gallery ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Redo shortcut (was: Undo shortcut)
/me returns from the hurricane, finally able to catch up on several days worth of email. On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However I *love* the Ctrl-R binding, especially because it lets me quickly compare the done and undone versions of an image using a single hand with very little effort. Try to do it with Ctrl-Z/Shift-Ctrl-Z and you'll find that you need either very good coordination between fingers (better than the one I have at least) or to use both hands. I agree. Gimp's undo and redo feature differs from many other programs in that when comparing subtle changes it is useful to switch rapidly between the before and after views, while for a program such as a word processor, that is probably not a useful thing to do. This being the case, this particular need of GIMP users was probably not considered by the HIG. Personally, I compare between the before and after by holding down control and hitting z or r as necessary. For some changes, I switch several times a second, as the human eye is remarkably able to detect small differences when they are animated. Switching between views this fast with accuracy is simply not possible using Shift-Ctrl-Z due the the physiology of the human hand. The optimal hand position is left on the shift and control and right on the z, with the finger on the shift moving every other beat of the other hand and the finger on the control key staying still. Here the body's natural cordination works against switching views quickly, as the nervous system will assume that the finger on the R key and that on the shift key should really be synchronized. This leads to errors. With the old bindings the natural cordination system helps to acomplish the task accurately and faster. So, if it's possible to have two different keybindings for the same command I'd like very much to have both. Unfortunately, it is not. Really, GTK should be made more flexable in this regard, but it is not a trival problem, due to how GTK handles accelerators. Since we only can choose one, it makes sense that we choose the one that ergonomics favors. I'm sure that in this case most usability people would say that actually being able to use the feature is more important than consistancy with some other apps. Especially because this particular funciton isn't particularly consistant between apps. On the other hand, we could go for both ergonomics and consistency by using MS Office's Ctrl-Y. Note that I am not recommending it. I think keeping redo the way it is in 1.2 is the best policy. BTW, the mail program I'm using right now (Forte Agent) uses Ctrl-R to redo. There we go, between that and tradition, we have all the justification we need. ;) Rockwalrus ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] How do I get a plugin into the offical release?
David Neary wrote: Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: According to http://registry.gimp.org/changes?max=15 the last change to a plug-in was done only a couple of days ago - so it seems the registry works at least for some people. Perhaps, but there are several things which should be possible which aren't. First, the majority of the plug-ins in the registry appear to be abandonware - 1.0 plug-ins that have never been updates to 1.2, never mind 1.3/2.0. We need a way to clean out the cruft (or at least hide it away). Second, the registry could do with a ranking system to have the most common and/or popular plug-ins appearing on the top of the lists of plug-ins. The only sorting system I've seen is alphabetically, which severely limits the usefullness of the site. Third, it is not possible to attach patches for existing plug-ins to a plug-in without being a plug-in maintainer. It would be nice if this were easier to do, perhaps with a comment system? Although I guess an inscription system makes some sense... Fourth, there needs to be a way to recover your password or something! My plugins died in the registry because the ability to update them was locked to an account that I'd forgotten the password to. --Adam -- Adam D. Moss . ,,^^ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.foxbox.org/ co:3 ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] How do I get a plugin into the offical release?
Carol Spears wrote: http://wiki.gimp.org/ is a nice holding place until the other stuff gets ironed out, imo. OK, I've put DBP up there because I think it's the most useful. I might add some others later. Let me know (or, I guess, just edit it) if I've done something horribly wrong. -- David Hodson -- this night wounds time ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] CVS - core/gimpdrawable.[ch] missing?
Hi there, Just wanted to post a quick heads-up: I just did a 'get latest' from CVS, and now I can't get gimp to compile. It seems that core/gimpdrawable.c and core/gimpdrawable.h are missing. There is a log comment which mentions a broken pipe during a commit, so it looks like those files just slipped through the cracks. Nothing major, but I thought I should mention it to somebody :-) Ben. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer Combination Modes - what files, please?
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Joao S. O. Bueno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Monday 22 September 2003 9:33 pm, Jeff Trefftzs wrote: Hi, I've been rooting through the source for gimp-1.3.20 looking in vain for the functions that handle the layer combination modes. Can someone please point me to the right files? TIA, gimp/app/paint-funcs The functions in app/paint-funcs are scheduled for removal. The composite functionality lives in app/composite now. :-) Oh well... It reminds me..it was still gimp 1.3.17 when I last had time to tweak with my custom mode stuff. I will take a look at the new stuff soon - I found the code at paint-funcs a bit messy, I just hope they got a little cleanner. Are all the old funcs gone and rewritten? or was something copy pasted? Sven Regards, JS -- ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Difference between 1.2 .gih and 1.3 .gih files?
On 23 Sep 2003, Jeff Trefftzs wrote: On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 04:10, Michael Natterer wrote: Just open the failing brushes with File-Open and save them again. The plug-in is still able to read these files and will save the new format. Thanks to Dave, Simon, and Mitch for the prompt replies. I'm converting the old brushes now. Hmm, this should make it into the release notes. Rockwalrus ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] How do I get a plugin into the offical release?
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, David Neary wrote: Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: According to http://registry.gimp.org/changes?max=15 the last change to a plug-in was done only a couple of days ago - so it seems the registry works at least for some people. Perhaps, but there are several things which should be possible which aren't. First, the majority of the plug-ins in the registry appear to be abandonware - 1.0 plug-ins that have never been updates to 1.2, never mind 1.3/2.0. We need a way to clean out the cruft (or at least hide it away). Second, the registry could do with a ranking system to have the most common and/or popular plug-ins appearing on the top of the lists of plug-ins. The only sorting system I've seen is alphabetically, which severely limits the usefullness of the site. Third, it is not possible to attach patches for existing plug-ins to a plug-in without being a plug-in maintainer. It would be nice if this were easier to do, perhaps with a comment system? Although I guess an inscription system makes some sense... This functionality sounds a lot like MozDev, which has a very useful list of active projects, or Sourceforge (or Gnu/Savannah/Whatever). Changing to a full blown project management system might make things easier to manage in the long run. Something to consider at least. - Alan H ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] CVS - core/gimpdrawable.[ch] missing?
Ben Campbell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I just did a 'get latest' from CVS, and now I can't get gimp to compile. It seems that core/gimpdrawable.c and core/gimpdrawable.h are missing. There is a log comment which mentions a broken pipe during a commit, so it looks like those files just slipped through the cracks. Nothing major, but I thought I should mention it to somebody :-) Simply cvs update your local tree again. A broken pipe can happen and is nothing to worry about. We can do nothing about that. If you are using anonymous cvs, consider using anoncvs3.gnome.org, since this apparently is the most stable one. Also hardcoding an anoncvs-server is a good idea, since they might get out of sync and you'll end up with a broken tree. Hope this helps, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
