Check:
http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/grad-fu/1-3-x.html
for a link to the up-to-date patch. This patch incorporates all the
changes that were present in its previous incarnations and then a nice
featurette of moving a segment.
Furthremore, it adds some refactoring to the gradient editor, in
On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 06:15:17PM +0100, David Neary wrote:
> Not at all. GTK+ lived in the GIMP source tree until it was
> capable of being a standalone project. Afterwards, its main
> developers were gimp developers. Unfortunately, several of them
> followed the path which GTK+ has become to go
Hi,
What is wrong about depending on GEGL and have people download and
compile it separately? GTK+ used to live in the GIMP source tree for
historical reasons only. I strongly doubt anyone would have wanted to
move it into the GIMP source tree if it was started as a separate
project. Why would you
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
> Because I believe that it will hurt the project to become part of the
> GIMP tarballs. It will be much more helpful if we help to create
> standalone GEGL releases early. This will raise interest in GEGL and
> it will make packages appear for all distributions.
Since nei
On Sunday 21 December 2003 18:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(...)
> >> I actually think Joao S. O. Buenos patch to the PNG plug-in is a
> >> nice addition/work around the optimization problem - I have yet
> >> to try it out, though.
> >
> >I haven't tried
Hi,
Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By "in an organised way", I mean simply that we make a decent effort
> before changing build requirements to let people know that they're
> going to be changed, when, why, and what they need to do to keep a
> working GIMP CVS build environment. This is
Hi,
Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Other people do this, so perhaps it's not as obviously insane as
> you're making out. There is no fear of the dependency... but until
> gegl is in a state where it's mature enough to make standalone
> releases, then it's more or less exclusively a GIMP
Hi,
This has split into 2 different issues again, replying twice with
appropriate subjects.
Sven Neumann wrote:
David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think that we could perhaps do the version bump in an organised
way this time, at least?
What are you trying to say here? I don't remember any
Hi again,
Sven Neumann wrote:
David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
What I would propose is that the GIMP CVS module have an app/gegl
directory which is linked to the gegl module, so that doing a cvs
co of the GIMP would also check out gegl.
This is insane. CVS modules cause nothing but trouble.
