Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Hi, On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 01:45 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That means it makes sense to work on a temporary solution before the big UI overhaul happens? There is no such thing as the big UI overhaul. It also does not make sense to work on temporary solutions. Instead someone needs to sit down with the UI team and work out a complete solution for Save and Export, and then start to implement it. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Sven Neumann wrote: Instead someone needs to sit down with the UI team and work out a complete solution for Save and Export, and then start to implement it. In that case I propose an IRC based scheduled and announced meeting on this topic with the UI team? That way anybody who wants to can give input and the output can be a complete spec for this. However the UI team seems to have vanished atm... -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Hi, On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 09:32 +0300, Alexia Death wrote: In that case I propose an IRC based scheduled and announced meeting on this topic with the UI team? That way anybody who wants to can give input and the output can be a complete spec for this. However the UI team seems to have vanished atm... No need to hurry. We are now talking about changing the Save/Export logic for almost a decade. If we can agree on the spec before 2.6 is out, then we can put it on the roadmap for GIMP 2.8 and actually try to get it done in time. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Hi, On Sat, 2008-06-07 at 14:51 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The current protection mechanism for closing images is insufficient as it doesn't differentiate between 'saved' and 'exported'. Yes, that is well-known and the plan is to change that at some point. But there is no one actively working on it. There are so many other much more interesting things to do and GIMP only has a very small group of active developers. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
On Sunday 08 June 2008 14:28:17 Sven Neumann wrote: On Sat, 2008-06-07 at 14:51 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The current protection mechanism for closing images is insufficient as it doesn't differentiate between 'saved' and 'exported'. Yes, that is well-known and the plan is to change that at some point. But there is no one actively working on it. There are so many other much more interesting things to do and GIMP only has a very small group of active developers. And apparently nobody can really work on things whether interesting or not without a spec... So how about making a spec how this is SUPPOSED to be handled, and then hoping somebody interested enough comes along to actually implement it? With spec I'd say chances of that happening are tenfold, and odds of something usable coming out of it are at least 80%. -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, On Sat, 2008-06-07 at 14:51 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The current protection mechanism for closing images is insufficient as it doesn't differentiate between 'saved' and 'exported'. Yes, that is well-known and the plan is to change that at some point. But there is no one actively working on it. There are so many other much more interesting things to do and GIMP only has a very small group of active developers. That means it makes sense to work on a temporary solution before the big UI overhaul happens? Sounds like a good place to start hacking the gimp .- peter -- GMX startet ShortView.de. Hier findest Du Leute mit Deinen Interessen! Jetzt dabei sein: http://www.shortview.de/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Solution:
1) the export warning for flat file formats should be optional ('do not
show this dialog again')
2) closing images, which have not been saved to
.xcf, should trigger a warning ('you have already exported this image to
.png, but you will loose all your layering/path information if you close
the image now')
I'm going to echo my support for this. The nags on saves are
counterproductive. Further more you will get them even when you are doing
a Save as Copy... that by essence is an intentional export and can cause no
dataloss... Any export should be handled with a nag on closing the actual
window with the pathlayer information, not on export itsself.
--
Best,
Alexia
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Alexia Death writes: I'm going to echo my support for this. The nags on saves are counterproductive. And often they're not even right -- e.g. The image has transparency, flatten? shows up on anything with an alpha channel even if every pixel is fully opaque. All those dialogs do is train the user to click OK without reading. ...Akkana ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
On Saturday 07 June 2008 20:01:17 Akkana Peck wrote: Alexia Death writes: I'm going to echo my support for this. The nags on saves are counterproductive. And often they're not even right -- e.g. The image has transparency, flatten? shows up on anything with an alpha channel even if every pixel is fully opaque. All those dialogs do is train the user to click OK without reading. Exactly... Witch has bitten me in the ass a few times... Namely the bizare confirmation to save a layer mask pops up right exactly before that. That's another bizare thing about saving... And since the number of dialogs varies between formats has been *click* *click* *click* Close, load Bah! Mask. How often would someone need to save just the mask? How about having a separate save option for that in the menu? -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Alexia Death [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [..] Exactly... Witch has bitten me in the ass a few times... That evil witch has bitten me a few times as well - even with the pentagram drawn under my workstation ;) Chris ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
Alexia Death wrote: How about having a separate save option for that in the menu? There are several feature requests about a changed export behavior: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75328 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75459 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164709 It has also been suggested to merge some of its actions into the save dialog: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=119545 HTH, Michael -- GIMP http://www.gimp.org | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Wiki http://wiki.gimp.org | .de: http://gimpforum.de Plug-ins http://registry.gimp.org | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
On Saturday 07 June 2008 21:47:06 Michael Schumacher wrote: There are several feature requests about a changed export behavior: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75328 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75459 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164709 It has also been suggested to merge some of its actions into the save dialog: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=119545 None of which handle he issue as a whole or propose a solutions that have been suggested here... Further more, since the things are still in status quo, I have to deduct that none of these has been considered The Right Solution by a person that could actually implement it. Some input from our missing in action GUI guru(Oy Peter, yes you!) would be appropriate here in my opinion, preferably in a form of a spec how this is supposed to work and then perhaps somebody, maybe even me(since my other stuff is waiting for a spec also) could work on it Exactly... Witch has bitten me in the ass a few times... That evil witch has bitten me a few times as well - even with the pentagram drawn under my workstation ;) You must put that pentagram under your chair, that way it protects your ass. This has worked for me since I did it (or I just have been lucky...) :P. -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More intelligent user protection from information loss
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 19:46:24 +0200, Alexia Death [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 07 June 2008 20:01:17 Akkana Peck wrote: Alexia Death writes: I'm going to echo my support for this. The nags on saves are counterproductive. And often they're not even right -- e.g. The image has transparency, flatten? shows up on anything with an alpha channel even if every pixel is fully opaque. All those dialogs do is train the user to click OK without reading. Exactly! Too many friendly comfirmation dialogues and we find ourselves in MSland where the user just goes yes.. yes.. yes.. without even reading. One big problem I have with my software is a user reports an issue and I ask if there was not an error message. Err , maybe I'm not sure... I think so, I did not read it. This is all a result of MS dumbing down the user. All the pointless confirmations like you just pressed cancel , are you really, really sure you meant cancel? Would you like to try again? just anesthetise the user to whatever pops up. So. first thing to realise is that your user is not a complete imbecile (which is the premise of MS). If the user choses to work in png and it does not have layers we don't need to bug him at every turn. He won't lose his data it will just be less editable next time. Second, if we know the only way to work is xcf it is not the function of gimp to badger the user into submission if he does not want to user that format for whatever reason. Once again, gimp claims to be top end this and that , not grandma's tool for removing red-eye from her birthday snapshots. We should credit the user with some intellegence. Things like this just generally get in the way. Exactly... Witch has bitten me in the ass a few times... Namely the bizare confirmation to save a layer mask pops up right exactly before that. That's another bizare thing about saving... And since the number of dialogs varies between formats has been *click* *click* *click* Close, load Bah! Mask. How often would someone need to save just the mask? How about having a separate save option for that in the menu? -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer -- .*. /V\ (/ \) ( ) ^^_^^ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
