Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Hi, Just giving a few answers. I really can't make the time right now and I think we will have to discuss this with voice, because it looks like several things I say are really not understandable (well they are by me, but my English may be lacking! At least I have to say the same thing again).

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Hi, I said I would not answer anymore, but I will (hopefully a last time) because I am weak and can't control my fingers! :P Anyway this discussion is very frustrating because my emails are not fully read. I'm sorry to say so Akkana, but your answer below is either off-topic, or actually going in

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Jehan Pagès writes: [on one repo per asset vs. one repo containing many assets] > Really I don't understand this point which Akkana is raising. Has > anyone ever made plugins for various software? I have, for a bunch, > many dead now, some still living. And never have I ever thought "oh > let's

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

To: Michael Schumacher Cc: gimp-web-list; GIMP Developer List Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-web] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Michael Schumacher <schum...@gmx.de> wrote: >> Gesendet: Montag, 04. April 2016 um 15:48

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Hi, On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 2:50 AM, Akkana Peck wrote: > Andrew Toskin writes: >> > On 2016-04-01 13:32, Pat David wrote: >> > Jehan suggested that each script/plugin/asset have it's own git repo. >> > This would be handy, particularly if script authors did this as well

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Michael Schumacher wrote: >> Gesendet: Montag, 04. April 2016 um 15:48 Uhr >> Von: "Jehan Pagès" > >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Michael Schumacher wrote: > >> > I am also still puzzled how the

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Hi, On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Michael Schumacher wrote: >> Gesendet: Montag, 04. April 2016 um 12:03 Uhr >> Von: "Jehan Pagès" > >> When I read this, I understand that I am really not clear. > >> So no, I am not saying and have never said that

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

s? > > Kevin > > > > From: gimp-developer-list <gimp-developer-list-boun...@gnome.org> on > behalf of Jehan Pagès <jehan.marmott...@gmail.com> > Sent: 04 April 2016 15:19 > To: Michael Schumacher > Cc: gimp-web-list; GIMP Developer

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

> Gesendet: Montag, 04. April 2016 um 12:03 Uhr > Von: "Jehan Pagès" > When I read this, I understand that I am really not clear. > So no, I am not saying and have never said that we would grab > repository from "elsewhere". I know patdavid seemed to have such an >

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Hello, On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Andrew Toskin wrote: > > >> On 2016-04-01 13:32, Pat David wrote: >> >> Organization >> = >> >> Jehan suggested that each script/plugin/asset have it's own git repo. >> This would be handy, particularly if script authors did this as

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Hello, On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 10:52 PM, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote: > An asset manager is undoubtedly something needed very badly - > > There are some features that would be needed - which Jehan summarized quite > well in an e-mail sent about 2 years ago (I remember the date

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

Hi, On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Andrew Toskin wrote: > > > I rather like GitLab, and this seems like at least as good a solution > for a plugin registry as any other solution we've considered so far. > > In fact, I think GitLab (or some similar solution) would also be a

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

An asset manager is undoubtedly something needed very badly - There are some features that would be needed - which Jehan summarized quite well in an e-mail sent about 2 years ago (I remember the date because I was just back from Leipzig) At first, I think requiring all assets to be in a git

Re: [Gimp-web] [Gimp-developer] Gitlab as a replacement for registry.gimp.org

On 1 April 2016 at 18:14, Kasim Ahmic wrote: > I personally am a huge supporter of redoing the registry, and I like the > ideas you've proposed here. My only concern is one that was actually brought > up by someone else a few months ago; registry integration within GIMP