Manfred Joerg wrote:
> Hello,
>
> are there currently any plans to implement adjustment layers in Gimp? If no,
> is there anybody who would like to support me doing it?
>
> I am an experienced software developer but I hardly know the source code of
> Gimp. So I think I could do it with some help.
On Monday 05 January 2009 18:41:58 Manfred Joerg wrote:
> Hello,
>
> are there currently any plans to implement adjustment layers in Gimp? If
> no, is there anybody who would like to support me doing it?
I suggest you come to #gimp channel on GimpNet irc network, most of the active
developers hang
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:41:58 +0100
Manfred Joerg wrote:
> Hello,
>
> are there currently any plans to implement adjustment layers in Gimp? If no,
> is there anybody who would like to support me doing it?
>
> I am an experienced software developer but I hardly know the source code of
> Gimp. So
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2007-10-10 at 1344.25 +0200):
> On Wednesday 10 October 2007 13:30:16 Andrew Young wrote:
> > Please excuse the noob question. Why are there no odd numbered releases?
> > e.g. 2.5? Do they have a special, internal role?
>
> According to old tradition, odd version numbers lik
On Wednesday 10 October 2007 13:30:16 Andrew Young wrote:
> Please excuse the noob question. Why are there no odd numbered releases?
> e.g. 2.5? Do they have a special, internal role?
It has been a long standing tradition amongst many (open source) programs that
odd numbered minor numbers indicat
Interesting. I've never been involved in open source development processes
before. What distinguishes a development version from a stable one? Is the
idea to have the development version more "open" with respect to what goes
in and then control which features are promoted from the development versi
On Wednesday 10 October 2007 13:30:16 Andrew Young wrote:
> Please excuse the noob question. Why are there no odd numbered releases?
> e.g. 2.5? Do they have a special, internal role?
According to old tradition, odd version numbers like 2.5 are for development
versions. There was Gimp 2.3 but it
Please excuse the noob question. Why are there no odd numbered releases? e.g.
2.5? Do they have a special, internal role?
Andy
On 10/8/07, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 21:29 +0930, David Gowers wrote:
>
> > AFAIK no, it was decided fairly informally, l
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 21:29 +0930, David Gowers wrote:
> AFAIK no, it was decided fairly informally, like in many OSS things --
> people talked, it became the accepted idea over time, and nobody much
> mentioned it outside of the GEGL-developer and GIMP-developer mailing
> lists where it was
David Gowers wrote:
>> You mentioned that GEGL integration is slated for 2.4...2.6 development.
>> Where can I find more information on plans for GIMP's development cycles?
>> Are these documented somewhere on developer.gimp.org?
>>
> AFAIK no, it was decided fairly informally, like in many OSS thi
On 10/8/07, Andrew Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David,
>
> Interesting. GEGL sounds very much in line with a lot of the ideas I have
> about how to approach the problem. Is this seen as the future of GIMP's
> core?
Image representation, certainly. Gimp's core -- maybe. That would
depend on h
David,
Interesting. GEGL sounds very much in line with a lot of the ideas I have
about how to approach the problem. Is this seen as the future of GIMP's
core? How big an effort is the port to GEGL expected to be? It sounds like
an exciting time to join the development team.
You mentioned that GEG
David Gowers wrote:
> there is http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/ for working out the UI
> (and http://www.mmiworks.net/eng/publications/labels/GIMP.html , the
> precursor).
let me clarify a bit:
http://gui.gimp.org is the place where the interaction team works.
http://www.mmiworks.net/eng/pu
On 10/7/07, Andrew Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have been an avid Gimp user for a number of years. I have always wished
> Gimp supported non-destructive image adjustments such those available with
> Photoshop "adjustment layers." ... Is anyone looking for a new feature to
> work on and wo
On 10/8/07, Andrew Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> I have been an avid Gimp user for a number of years. I have always wished
> Gimp supported non-destructive image adjustments such those available with
> Photoshop "adjustment layers." From searching around the internet, it seems
>
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 06:49:29PM +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Carol Spears wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 11:36:19AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
> >>Carol Spears wrote:
> >>>okay, i am at a disadvantage here as i am not a photoshop user nor a
> >>>gimp developer -- however, i will try t
Hi,
Carol Spears wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 11:36:19AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
Carol Spears wrote:
okay, i am at a disadvantage here as i am not a photoshop user nor a
gimp developer -- however, i will try to describe what the developers
need before they will help you.
You are hardly an autho
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 11:36:19AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
> Carol,
>
> Carol Spears wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 02:46:24AM +0200, Baard Ove Kopperud wrote:
> >>I'm not 100% sure I understand your question, but I'll
> >>try to explain how it works (from the users pov) in PS...
> >
> >okay,
Carol,
Carol Spears wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 02:46:24AM +0200, Baard Ove Kopperud wrote:
I'm not 100% sure I understand your question, but I'll
try to explain how it works (from the users pov) in PS...
okay, i am at a disadvantage here as i am not a photoshop user nor a
gimp developer -- how
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 02:46:24AM +0200, Baard Ove Kopperud wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 15:34:18 -0800, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 01:03:43AM +0200, Baard Ove Kopperud wrote:
>
> >adjusted to what? is there an api for this?
>
> I'm not 100% sure I under
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 01:03:43AM +0200, Baard Ove Kopperud wrote:
> I must shamefully admit that I have yet to try GIMP 2.0, so
> if adjustments-layers is part of it, then I appolegize for
> post.
This falls into the category of "frequently asked questions".
They are often called "effect layers
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 01:03:43AM +0200, Baard Ove Kopperud wrote:
> I must shamefully admit that I have yet to try GIMP 2.0, so
> if adjustments-layers is part of it, then I appolegize for
> post.
>
> +++
>
> I've been using both PhotoShop and GIMP for some time, and
> one of the few things fro
22 matches
Mail list logo
