Hi,
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:06 AM, Jehan Pagès jehan.marmott...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi again,
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Jehan Pagès
jehan.marmott...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Michael Henning
dra...@darkrefraction.com wrote:
This was replied to just me,
On 12/03/2013 02:10 PM, Teo Mazars wrote:
The way GEGL currently exposes each numerical parameters is as follow:
1) A nominal range, say [a, b], which represents the range where the operation
is expected to work
2) An UI range, [a', b'] included in [a, b], representing the area of interest
This Gaussian blur slider range doesn't really allow slider selection
of
small, precise values less than 1, so typing in values is still
necessary. A logarithm-type scale might be better than a linear scale
as
the useful range for blur necessarily is large, and the larger the
image, the
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Partha Bagchi parth...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Sven,
Have been away for the Thanksgiving holidays.:)
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 4:59 AM, scl scl.gp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
today there was [bugreport] about outdated builds for OSX.
One reason for not being
Hi again!
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Jehan Pagès jehan.marmott...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Partha Bagchi parth...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Sven,
Have been away for the Thanksgiving holidays.:)
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 4:59 AM, scl scl.gp...@gmail.com wrote:
