Re: [Gimp-developer] removing gimp toys, second opinion please?

2004-07-22 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi,

Alan Horkan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 If you still reject the idea I would ask you to keep the toys in mind when
 it comes to menu reorganisation.  (Wiki is still down otherwise I'd add
 this to the menu reorganisation document we had there).
 The Gnome HIG recommends:

 http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/menus.html#menu-type-submenu
 Do not create submenus with fewer than three items, unless the items are
 added dynamically (for example the File-New Tab submenu in gnome-terminal).

Looks as if we need a third Toy then. Any volunteers?


Sven
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] removing gimp toys, second opinion please?

2004-07-22 Thread Nathan Carl Summers
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Alan Horkan wrote:


 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148027

 Given that some less used file formats have been removed in recently
 releases on the basis of less code to maintain and less general clutter I
 suggested that the old Toys be removed from the Gimp for version 2.2.  To
 my surprise Mitch rejected the idea (without much explanation), Adam who
 wrote the toys didn't seem to think it was a terrible idea so I'm asking
 onlist to try and get a second opinion.

If Excel had a flight simulator, Gimp can have a few toys.  :)

 If toys like Gee-Zoom were built on top of a useful plugin (eg some sort
 of a kaleidescope plugin for example) I wouldn't even be asking but they
 toy are not useful at all sso users are just presented with eye-candy and
 left wondering how they can get that effect on their actual image but they
 cannot.

I guess it wouldn't be impossible to have Gee-Zoom render individual
frames as layers, but that ignores the real question, which is why we
don't have some cool effect like gee-slime on the splash screen.

 If you still reject the idea I would ask you to keep the toys in mind when
 it comes to menu reorganisation.  (Wiki is still down otherwise I'd add
 this to the menu reorganisation document we had there).

 The Gnome HIG recommends:
 http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/menus.html#menu-type-submenu
 Do not create submenus with fewer than three items, unless the items are
 added dynamically (for example the File-New Tab submenu in
 gnome-terminal).

Fortunately, this is only a recommendation.  Since the toys are rarely
used, I think the uniformity of the Filters menu having just submenus and
the usefullness of having the Toys being explicitly labeled as such is
better overall.  If we broke out all the menus that have only two items, I
don't think the menu would fit on the screen. :)

Besides, the best solution is to add another toy.

Rockwalrus

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] removing gimp toys, second opinion please?

2004-07-22 Thread Alan Horkan

  If you still reject the idea I would ask you to keep the toys in mind when
  it comes to menu reorganisation.  (Wiki is still down otherwise I'd add
  this to the menu reorganisation document we had there).
  The Gnome HIG recommends:
 
  http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/1.0/menus.html#menu-type-submenu
  Do not create submenus with fewer than three items, unless the items are
  added dynamically (for example the File-New Tab submenu in gnome-terminal).

 Looks as if we need a third Toy then. Any volunteers?

Putting them somewhere else in the menus would be easier.  (Misc? Distort?)

- Alan
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer