-- Forwarded message --
From: Laxminarayan Kamath [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:41:01 -0800
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: whishes for Gimp
To: Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 00:32:23 +0100, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 08:59:59PM +0100, Michael Natterer wrote:
Hi,
What version of GIMP is this?
(assuming this is CVS HEAD, it looks like there is something wrong
with expr and the test fails because of that, rather than because of
too old automake).
What does /bin/sh point to?
Sven wrote:
You obviously didn't understand me. Adding such an API would be a
major undertaking and we are not going to add such a framework for
anyone unless that someone has at least built a prototype in the
core. I do simply not believe that there is serious interest for
developing other
Sven wrote:
If you had a look at the Ink tool you would have noticed that all
paint tools are extraordinarily simple. I agree that other tools
(those that draw to the display) are a lot more complex but all paint
tools are identical except that they register different GimpPaintCore
objects.
Ok, for those who are wondering,
this is discussion is tied with what I've requested in
[Bug 140165] A Paint Tool that allows stroke events to callback
plug-in procedures
My initial wriitng in there was:
Hi,
I know it had been thought before, but anyway could not find it in
bugzilla. So here it
Hi,
William Skaggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I think I have demonstrated that I need to create or modify at
least 10 files to produce a new paint tool, and I have probably
missed something along the way. But I will admit that the danger of
code collision does not seem all that large.
