Hi,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann )> writes:
> I am trying to make you realize that ignoring problems does not make
> them go away. Sorry for being a pain in the ass...
Marc, if I wanted to ignore the problems, I would simply ignore you.
Can you please stop using the ignore argument?
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:28:56PM +0200, Michael Schumacher <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I still believe that making language-specific menus is a disservice to
> > users. It's only use is for marketing of the language in question ("oh,
> > so it's in script-fu!"). But such ideas were and probab
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 10:24:46PM +0200, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Giles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I don't think the list can afford to lose the input of either one of you.
>
> Don't worry. We are just having some fun. At least I hope that Marc
> does. I am certainly enj
Hi,
Giles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't think the list can afford to lose the input of either one of you.
Don't worry. We are just having some fun. At least I hope that Marc
does. I am certainly enjoying it.
Sven
___
Gimp-developer mailing li
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann ) wrote:
> If you mean that I didn't make a separate Perl subhierarchy like
> script-fu does (or did), then yes, this I did because I believed
> that a user must not be forced to learn the difference between a
> C/Script-Fu/python/perl/whatever plug-in. It m
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 11:20:44AM -0700, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> completely off-thread, i would like to see the way mr. lehmann has the
> menu structure set in his own personal instance of gimp.
I never ever changed the menu structure compared to the cvs/source
releases, and I
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 08:46:55AM -0700, William Skaggs wrote:
>
> Giles wrote:
> > I don't think the list can afford to lose the input of either one of you.
>
> I wouldn't worry too much about it. Compared to flame-fests of the
> past, this one is pretty much a yawner. At least they're arguin
Giles wrote:
> I don't think the list can afford to lose the input of either one of you.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. Compared to flame-fests of the
past, this one is pretty much a yawner. At least they're arguing
about questions of fact.
-- Bill
"The one advantage of playing with
On Tuesday 21 June 2005 19:55, Giles wrote:
> I don't think the list can afford to lose the input of either one
> of you.
Agree. Please find a way to work together, or at least constructively
ignore one another.
Cheers; Leon
--
http://cyberknights.com.au/ Modern tools; traditional dedicati
Hi Marc, Sven.
I don't know if there's a list protocol about this, or maybe it's well
established that peacemakers like myself are pretty much bound to fail, but
I thought I'd give it a shot ...
I've been on the internet for many years, and I've been insulted and flamed
quite a number of times.
10 matches
Mail list logo
