On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> But the fact is that you're going to end up having to Base64
> encode all the image data - which will blow the physical file size
> WAY out of proportion. And if don't do that (ie. attempt to leave in
> binary data), then you are violating the
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Hans Breuer wrote:
> I'm about to give it another try with current cvs code
> base, but before I would like to get some information
> to avoid (if possible) fast rotting bits.
>
> In short the approach (more info in bugzilla) :
> - Intercept every PDB call if a macro recorder
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Alan Horkan wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Sven Neumann wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:57:18 +0200
> > From: Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Menubar in fullscreen mode [Re: [Gimp-devel
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Nathan Carl Summers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Fullscreen mode was added to be able to view the image in a neutral
> environment w/o being distracted by any user interface elements.
> Adding a menubar would comple
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to inform you about our plans for the GIMP 2.0 release.
>
> First of all, Mitch and me are not willing to raise the 2.0 versus 1.4
> discussion again.
Gimp is more than "Mitch and me," isn't it?
> Both sides have expressed their argumen
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I do not know the X11 license, but changing the license of
> the plugin template recalls me of one thing:
>
> If the GIMP is under the GPL, with no exceptions listed were
> appropriate, them it is ilegal for non GPL-compatible plugins to be
>
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Adam D. Moss wrote:
> 2) It might be argued that the basic dependance and interconnection
> of a not-GPL-compatible plug-in with the GPL GIMP core via libgimp
> and the wire protocol is intimate enough that the two cannot be
> considered independent and separate wo
On 30 Jul 2003, Jay Cox wrote:
> This was the first chance I've had to spend quality time with gimp in
> several years. After this long separation from gimp, I feel that my
> eyes are pretty fresh.
Whho! I think I speak for all of us old fogies when I say,
"Welcome back!"
Rockwalrus
_
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jay Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> You have a point, I dont much like the proposed solution though.
> >
> > Any other solution would probably be too complex to implement at this
> > point in the release cycle.
>
> We finally got rid of the
> Like in any Free Software project, developers are leaving from time to
> time to pursue other projects. And from time to time, new developers
> are joining the team and starting to contribute. However, it looks
> like the number of new developers joining the GIMP development has
> been decreasi
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Adam D. Moss wrote:
> IIRC, the Loki guys. Some ramblings a few years ago on the
> problems of interoperability of game data between
> windows/mac/linuxx86/linuxalpha/etc over network and on disk.
> They made a special point of saying something like 'never, ever
> serialize f
Good to get some high-quality feedback.
On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> At 6:01 PM -0700 8/8/03, Nathan Carl Summers wrote:
> >Let us start with an existing graphics format, for inspiration if nothing
> >else.
>
> OK.
>
>
> >The format I cho
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> At 1:47 PM +0200 8/14/03, Sven Neumann wrote:
> >I'd like to mention that none of the proposed formats except the XML
> >approach would be capable of supporting the stuff we want to add to GIMP
> >with GEGL.
>
> Well, that pretty much settles t
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Øyvind Kolås wrote:
> * Adam D. Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030814 09:59]:
> > Stephen J Baker wrote:
> > >So, I think what is needed to make a reliable file format is to provide
> > >a well written library for reading and writing the files that's freely
> > >available and prope
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> hmm...Agreeded.
>
> I'd suggest 10 days instead of 5 (if I, for an example, am on a heavy
> workload week, 5 days could not be enough to make my points, if they
> need soem expermenting on the codebase), But since the decision was
> taken, so mote it b
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> At 7:18 PM +0200 8/10/03, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote:
> >About TIFF, every now and then someone appears with an horror story about TIFF
> >files, so while better than PSD, I dunno if enough. :/
>
> There are programs out there
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Adam D. Moss wrote:
> Nathan Carl Summers wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Adam D. Moss wrote:
> >>IIRC, the Loki guys. Some ramblings a few years ago on the
> >>problems of interoperability of game data between
> >>windows/mac/linuxx86/lin
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> At 11:42 PM + 8/13/03, Phil Harper wrote:
> >well, it'd be interesting to see if Adobe added XCF to Photo$hop,
> >after all, GIMP is the competition, it wouldn't be in their
> >interests to support a multilayered image format that it controlled
>
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Sven Neumann wrote:
[Note: quote blocks have been reordered for clarity]
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to mention that none of the proposed formats except the XML
> approach would be capable of supporting the stuff we want to add to GIMP
> with GEGL.
On the contrary, my proposal would h
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2003-08-08 at 1801.54 -0700):
> > Portable XCF would use a chunk system similar to PNG, with two major
> > differences. First, chunk type would be a string instead of a 32-bit
> > value. Second, chunks can cont
Several XCF formats have already been proposed; why should I propose
another? It seems to me like the existing proposals have all missed the
main point. While they have nice properties for certain extreme cases,
they miss the boat when it comes to the main point of a graphics format,
which is to
On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> >I see fast loads as an absolute requirement.
>
> Then we need to also look at the GIMP itself and what can be
> done there.
Of course.
> >Hopefully, GIMP's file handling will improve to the point where it will
> >load thing on an as-needed ba
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Austin Donnelly wrote:
> > > How is the serialization done then, just a raw 32-bit IEEE float
> > > dump with a predefined endianness? 64-bit doubles just as easy?
> >
> > Yup.
>
> The real problem comes when your code is running on a system without IEEE
> float support, and
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I never understood the reasoning for this discussion anyway. IMHO the
> format that Nathan suggested seems like something from the dark ages of
> file formats (where TIFF and the like originated from).
PNG is something from the dark ages?
> I h
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there is something I hacked up during GimpCon and I thought it might be
> of interest to some of you although it's not yet finished (and perhaps
YEY!
(This is a very good thing.)
Rockwalrus
___
G
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> Well, this may be a bit controversial,
I don't think that there is any disagreement about software patents among
the major gimp developers.
> but I thought about supporting the demonstration against software
> patents in Europe by replacing the GIMP h
101 - 126 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
