Re: [Gimp-developer] Gradient fill not working in CVS Head
On Tuesday 23 December 2003 20:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In another message you wrote: > >I was working, and noted that gradient fill is working poorly in > > CVS HEAD - the first color, or beggning of the first segment of > > the gradient, is taking up almost all the area to be filled. > > Have you checked the Offset setting? It's supposed to do exactly > that. Like Homer would have said: DOH! > > Pedro Gimeno ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Gradient fill not working in CVS Head
On Tuesday 23 December 2003 19:40, Sven Neumann wrote: > Hi, > > "Joao S. O. Bueno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I am going out right now, and have no time to fill a proper bug > > report. I was working, and noted that gradient fill is working > > poorly in CVS HEAD - the first color, or beggning of the first > > segment of the gradient, is taking up almost all the area to be > > filled. > > I cannot reproduce this here. It might be a problem caused by some library on my system. We have to isolate it, nonetheless. > > > Anyway, the fill is far from being linear. > > If you are doing a gradient from a dark to a light color, it won't > look linear unless you gamma-correct your display. The color-picker > should show you that the color values are linearily distributed. > Actually, it is not gamma related. I have attached the files to bug 129931 for everyone involved to take a look. > Sven Regards, JS -><- ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] GIMP Aqua GTK+OSX
GIMP on Mac OS X without X11: http://gtk-osx.sourceforge.net/docs/gimp.html Cheers, Robin --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hollywood, California www.CinePaint.org Free motion picture and still image editing software ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Gradient fill not working in CVS Head
Hi, "Joao S. O. Bueno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am going out right now, and have no time to fill a proper bug > report. I was working, and noted that gradient fill is working > poorly in CVS HEAD - the first color, or beggning of the first > segment of the gradient, is taking up almost all the area to be > filled. I cannot reproduce this here. > Anyway, the fill is far from being linear. If you are doing a gradient from a dark to a light color, it won't look linear unless you gamma-correct your display. The color-picker should show you that the color values are linearily distributed. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Gradient fill not working in CVS Head
Hi there, I am going out right now, and have no time to fill a proper bug report. I was working, and noted that gradient fill is working poorly in CVS HEAD - the first color, or beggning of the first segment of the gradient, is taking up almost all the area to be filled. Anyway, the fill is far from being linear. I took a look at the Changelog and saw no gradient related stuff but the recent patch that showed up in this list. Anyway, could someone confirm the bug, and fill the bug report/fix it? Regards, JS -><- ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] Re: [Gimp-developer] GEGL in GIMP
Hi, Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What is wrong about depending on GEGL and have people download and > > compile it separately? GTK+ used to live in the GIMP source tree for > > historical reasons only. I strongly doubt anyone would have wanted to > > move it into the GIMP source tree if it was started as a separate > > project. Why would you want to do this with GEGL now? > > What's wrong with having gegl sources to download with the latest > release on the FTP server, the same way we used to have libaa, libmpg, > libpng and all the other stuff we needed? Up until 1.2.x, we used to > have gtk+ and glib sources with gimp sources. What was wrong with that? Putting the tarballs somewhere close to the GIMP tarball on the FTP server is of course reasonable. But unless I completely misunderstood you earlier, you proposed to include gegl as a virtual CVS module and to include it in the GIMP tarball. That's what we've been discussing here. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: [PATCH] Gradient-Fu for 1.3.x - Complete but not Final
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Dave Neary wrote: > > Hi Shlomi, > > Shlomi Fish wrote: > > Check: > > > > http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/grad-fu/1-3-x.html > > > > for a link to the up-to-date patch. > > Thanks for the patch. Would you mind attaching this to the bug report, > just in case your hard-drive fries over the holidays or something? > Sure thing. Even though, I have a copy of it on two different computers. t2.technion.ac.il is the Technion's Undergrad Students' computer and it runs a very reliable Solaris system. (which did not cause me any problems so far). The security there leaves a lot to be desired, though. Regards, Shlomi Fish > Cheers, > Dave. > > -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two doctors away. Falk Fish ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] Re: [Gimp-developer] GEGL in GIMP
Manish Singh wrote: On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 09:35:09AM +0100, Dave Neary wrote: OK - fair enough. It's a standalone project. But we're going to use it, and need it, and from what I recall, calvin was looking for more GIMP input into what it should do. How do you propose we get that kind of communication happenning? Not sure. Something to think about more post-2.0. We could think about it now, and do something about it post 2.0 :) That's all I am doing is throwing ideas around. The beneficial part was having GIMP use GTK+. Period. Having it part of the actual source tree didn't really contribute to that benefit much at all, since it would've gotten worked on regardless. So having the GIMP use gegl will be beneficial to gegl :) In any case, that is not the goal of the 2.2 release. I still believe that always stable, always releasable, with a 6 week freeze on functionality and a release for GUADEC are the technical goals of the 2.1.x series. If we start using tiny bits of gegl, then that's great. I'm afraid I didn't follow the logic of this... how is this a counter-argument to having gegl and gimp downloads in the same directory? You didn't propose having gegl and gimp downloads in the same directory till today. So I don't follow the logic. ;) The post you replied to immediately before this one talked about having the tarballs together. I posted that yesterday. I don't really mind symlinking the gegl sources into the gimp ftp dir, but that's a fairly minor thing. Most people follow webpage links rather than poking through an ftp site these days, and the download webpage should of course link to gegl. I agree. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] Re: [Gimp-developer] GEGL in GIMP
On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 09:27:17AM +0100, Dave Neary wrote: > Hi, > > Sven Neumann wrote: > >What is wrong about depending on GEGL and have people download and > >compile it separately? GTK+ used to live in the GIMP source tree for > >historical reasons only. I strongly doubt anyone would have wanted to > >move it into the GIMP source tree if it was started as a separate > >project. Why would you want to do this with GEGL now? > > What's wrong with having gegl sources to download with the latest > release on the FTP server, the same way we used to have libaa, libmpg, > libpng and all the other stuff we needed? Up until 1.2.x, we used to > have gtk+ and glib sources with gimp sources. What was wrong with that? Actually, as far as I can recall, the gtk+ and gimp sources were not in the same directory since before 1.0.0. -Yosh ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] Re: [Gimp-developer] GEGL in GIMP
On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 09:35:09AM +0100, Dave Neary wrote: > Manish Singh wrote: > >On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 06:15:17PM +0100, David Neary wrote: > >>The point is that as it is, gegl is not a standalone project. > >But it *is* a standalone project. That's been the intent from the > >beginning. > >I don't see how "incubation" helps it in any way. There are people who > >have indicated wanting to use it for other projects besides GIMP already. > > OK - fair enough. It's a standalone project. But we're going to use it, > and need it, and from what I recall, calvin was looking for more GIMP > input into what it should do. How do you propose we get that kind of > communication happenning? Not sure. Something to think about more post-2.0. > >GTK+ was distributed as part of GIMP until people found out that "hey, this > >is a useful general purpose toolkit". We already know that with GEGL. There > >weren't any notable positive benefits with keeping GTK+ as part of the GIMP > >tree. > > Except that until people noticed that it was a useful general purpose > toolkit, it kept getting worked on, with a particular application in > mind... I think that being part of the GIMP was enormously beneficial to > gtk+. The beneficial part was having GIMP use GTK+. Period. Having it part of the actual source tree didn't really contribute to that benefit much at all, since it would've gotten worked on regardless. In fact, it was a minor hindrance, since GIMP specific stuff like GtkGamma got stuck in the general purpose library, and now the GTK+ folk have to maintain it when it doesn't actually belong. > >There isn't any point. The problem with dependencies most people have is > >not downloading and installing tarballs, but rather the mess that is > >Freetype library incompatibilites and by extension any of the things > >that directly depend on it. > > > >GEGL doesn't depend on any external library GIMP doesn't already need. > > I'm afraid I didn't follow the logic of this... how is this a > counter-argument to having gegl and gimp downloads in the same directory? > > Note, I'm no longer advocating shipping gegl as part of the GIMP sources > - although I see no reason not to do that personally, I can see that > most people are against it and don't consider it the thing to do (that > said, only 3 people have replied with a preference). You didn't propose having gegl and gimp downloads in the same directory till today. So I don't follow the logic. ;) I don't really mind symlinking the gegl sources into the gimp ftp dir, but that's a fairly minor thing. Most people follow webpage links rather than poking through an ftp site these days, and the download webpage should of course link to gegl. -Yosh ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [PATCH] Gradient-Fu for 1.3.x - Complete but not Final
Hi Shlomi, Shlomi Fish wrote: Check: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/grad-fu/1-3-x.html for a link to the up-to-date patch. Thanks for the patch. Would you mind attaching this to the bug report, just in case your hard-drive fries over the holidays or something? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] Re: [Gimp-developer] GEGL in GIMP
Manish Singh wrote: On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 06:15:17PM +0100, David Neary wrote: The point is that as it is, gegl is not a standalone project. But it *is* a standalone project. That's been the intent from the beginning. I don't see how "incubation" helps it in any way. There are people who have indicated wanting to use it for other projects besides GIMP already. OK - fair enough. It's a standalone project. But we're going to use it, and need it, and from what I recall, calvin was looking for more GIMP input into what it should do. How do you propose we get that kind of communication happenning? GTK+ was distributed as part of GIMP until people found out that "hey, this is a useful general purpose toolkit". We already know that with GEGL. There weren't any notable positive benefits with keeping GTK+ as part of the GIMP tree. Except that until people noticed that it was a useful general purpose toolkit, it kept getting worked on, with a particular application in mind... I think that being part of the GIMP was enormously beneficial to gtk+. There isn't any point. The problem with dependencies most people have is not downloading and installing tarballs, but rather the mess that is Freetype library incompatibilites and by extension any of the things that directly depend on it. GEGL doesn't depend on any external library GIMP doesn't already need. I'm afraid I didn't follow the logic of this... how is this a counter-argument to having gegl and gimp downloads in the same directory? Note, I'm no longer advocating shipping gegl as part of the GIMP sources - although I see no reason not to do that personally, I can see that most people are against it and don't consider it the thing to do (that said, only 3 people have replied with a preference). Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] Re: [Gimp-developer] GEGL in GIMP
Hi, Sven Neumann wrote: What is wrong about depending on GEGL and have people download and compile it separately? GTK+ used to live in the GIMP source tree for historical reasons only. I strongly doubt anyone would have wanted to move it into the GIMP source tree if it was started as a separate project. Why would you want to do this with GEGL now? What's wrong with having gegl sources to download with the latest release on the FTP server, the same way we used to have libaa, libmpg, libpng and all the other stuff we needed? Up until 1.2.x, we used to have gtk+ and glib sources with gimp sources. What was wrong with that? Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
