Hi,
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 18:06 +, William Skaggs wrote:
* Construct an optional MDI version of the gui.
That is definitely not a goal. We are not willing nor able to maintain
optional user interfaces. The UI has to evolve and it will be highly
customizable, but we are not going to offer
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 04:38 +, William Skaggs wrote:
8. improve the text tool
Evaluation: Most of the points mentioned here would be relatively
simple to implement. One of them -- the ability to have multiple
text items within a single layer -- might not be simple, and it should
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 20:20 +0100, peter sikking wrote:
Even before 2.4 came out, I was warned that not to much UI
work could be done for 2.6. GEGL first. OK. suits me, that
leaves a period where the UI analysis can get (finally!) done
and a transition can be made towards tackling the
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:48 +0300, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
Well, there _had been_ a beta version of the list (to which several
people including myself contributed) and since then nothing has
happened, so I was wondering if you still liked that idea ;-)
I did not like any of the beta
On Jan 25, 2008 11:01 AM, Sven Neumann wrote:
Actually, I don't think that we need to put action recording on our list
as that will become obsolete with non-destructive editing.
This is apples and oranges, Sven :-) Non-destructive editing boosts
productivity as well, but has nothing (or very
On Jan 25, 2008 10:06 PM, Sven Neumann wrote:
I think it would be a lot more useful if we would just collect a list of
tasks that we consider important, without sticking them into a
particular release time-frame.
This is what Inkscape guys do. They have a roadmap based on a rough
estimation,
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 20:03 +, William Skaggs wrote:
I think it would be a lot more useful if we would just collect a list of
tasks that we consider important, without sticking them into a
particular release time-frame. That will make it easier for new
developers to participate.
Hi Ettore.
Ettore Pasquini ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I work for 3Dconnexion (a Logitech company) and we make 3D input devices.
We also care about popular 2D apps that could use the high sensitivity of
our SpaceNavigator for panning and zooming. GIMP was under our radar and
now we are
Hello everyone,
I work for 3Dconnexion (a Logitech company) and we make 3D input devices.
We also care about popular 2D apps that could use the high sensitivity of
our SpaceNavigator for panning and zooming. GIMP was under our radar and
now we are considering to add support for our devices.
I
From: Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, we have that for 2.6. We didn't put publish it. But we discussed
these points and agreed on a roadmap for 2.6. The question is, do we
gain anything if we published such a roadmap officially? I am afraid
that the only result would be that people will
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 23:50:56 +1030
From: David Gowers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jan 25, 2008 9:52 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine
All the users who ever bugged you asking for macros
recording did it because they don't feel like programmers to learn
Script/Python/Perl-Fu.
With
Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 06:35 +0100, Martin Nordholts wrote:
It would also be nice to get the Polygonal Select Tool details sorted
out for 2.6. There is code for such a tool in bug #119646 [1], the
question is just to what extent it should be merged/integrated with
Hi Alexandre,
On Jan 25, 2008 9:52 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 25, 2008 11:01 AM, Sven Neumann wrote:
Actually, I don't think that we need to put action recording on our list
as that will become obsolete with non-destructive editing.
This is apples and
On Jan 25, 2008 4:20 PM, David Gowers wrote:
What significant sequence of actions that you can take is there, that
cannot be done by simple graph editing?
Users do not think in terms of graphs, they think in terms of actions
and sequences of actions. They want to click Record, mess around with
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 17:21 +, William Skaggs wrote:
The idea I was responding to was, as I understood it, basically to have
multiple PangoLayouts within the same layer. Even that would probably
not be so difficult to implement, but I think it would probably cause more
harm than
On Jan 26, 2008 12:09 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 25, 2008 4:20 PM, David Gowers wrote:
What significant sequence of actions that you can take is there, that
cannot be done by simple graph editing?
Users do not think in terms of graphs, they think in terms of
On Jan 25, 2008 4:54 PM, David Gowers wrote:
In short -- what you call 'action recording', I call 'packaging up a
chunk of the undo stack'. Really, your 'start' and 'stop' actions
would be trivial to implement:
mark the start location in undo stack; mark the end; and prompt the
user for a
From: Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps if we could first decide what the purpose of the roadmap/task
list should be. I tried to raise that question when we started with this
topic. But no one ever attempted to answer it. So before we start this
again, can we have this discussion,
From: Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8. improve the text tool
Evaluation: Most of the points mentioned here would be relatively
simple to implement. One of them -- the ability to have multiple
text items within a single layer -- might not be simple, and it should
be considered
19 matches
Mail list logo