Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 08:19:16PM -0300, Pedro Kiefer wrote: I've just made this mockup (attached) of how the locking mechanism should appear to the user in the layers tab. But that could be wrong, in not really familiar with the GNOME HIG. Clicking in an unlocked lock will lock the layer, clicking in a locked lock will unlock it. I think the lock should be in front of the layer names, right after visibility but before chaining, as it will block the later mechanism. There should be a third state for chaining, showing the symbol halfway faded out or something like that, to indicate it having no effect when the layer is locked. But I'm in doubt if locking is worth the space and additional visual complexity. I mean, if you don't want to change the contents of a layer, just don't select it. If you manage to draw/edit in the wrong layer, there's always undo and you should save frequently anyway. --- Thorsten Wilms ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] About Preferences enrtry in the Edit menu
Hi, Nathan Summers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I used to have a co-worker that would often say that if a user can't find a feature, it doesn't exist. Even after rummaging through the code with grep for a few minutes, the only menu I can find that allows you to import an SVG is the one that you right-click an existing item in the Paths dialog to get. I'd have to say that since even a casual but directed search through the source code can't find the menu that you're talking about, the discoverablity of the feature is impressively bad. All dockable have a menu which can be opened by clicking on the little arrow icon in the upper right corner. The first submenu is always the one the same menu that is also accessible via right-click on an item. If you can make the empty list show this menu on right-click, please send a patch. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Hi, Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I also think that it will clutter the rows too much if we move it to the front. Perhaps consider to add it on the top of the dialog with the opacity slider and the Lock Alpha Channel toggle ? I don't think this is practical. In Skencil I use locking of layers as a method to quickly protect the layers of the objects I am not using. However, that means that I iterate over the column of the layer locking buttons and decide if I want to change that layer or not. Having to individually select the layers and then toggle the button somewhere else makes this feature basically useless. Well, we do that already for the alpha channel lock and it doesn't seem to work that badly. Sooner or later we will probably want to add more such toggles. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Simon Budig wrote: Also we should consider making the layers not selectable in the layers dialog if they are locked. This removes a source of confusion (why doesn't this work) and gives immediate additional feedback about the locking. I was about to suggest this myself, but then dismissed it because of the why can't I select the layer? problem. However, it requires the locking button in the layer row itself. Hm, if you can't select it (e.g. with the cursor keys), how are you going to change the lock state using the keyboard? Michael -- The 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 http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Sven Neumann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I also think that it will clutter the rows too much if we move it to the front. Perhaps consider to add it on the top of the dialog with the opacity slider and the Lock Alpha Channel toggle ? I don't think this is practical. In Skencil I use locking of layers as a method to quickly protect the layers of the objects I am not using. However, that means that I iterate over the column of the layer locking buttons and decide if I want to change that layer or not. Having to individually select the layers and then toggle the button somewhere else makes this feature basically useless. Well, we do that already for the alpha channel lock and it doesn't seem to work that badly. Sooner or later we will probably want to add more such toggles. actually the alpha channel lock is a major source of confusion, sometimes even for me. Huh, painting doesn't work. Also it has a different use pattern: Your descision if you need to toggle it depends only on the layer itself. This is - as I explained - very much different from locking the layer completely: Your attention shifts to a different group of layers and you want to toggle this on multiple layers simultaneously. With your proposed solution it would be a major PITA to do this. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://simon.budig.de/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Michael Schumacher ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Also we should consider making the layers not selectable in the layers dialog if they are locked. This removes a source of confusion (why doesn't this work) and gives immediate additional feedback about the locking. I was about to suggest this myself, but then dismissed it because of the why can't I select the layer? problem. However, it requires the locking button in the layer row itself. Hm, if you can't select it (e.g. with the cursor keys), how are you going to change the lock state using the keyboard? Good question. Probably we need to grey out the layer somehow instead. Or decouple focussing from selecting for these layers. Not sure if this is easily possible. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://simon.budig.de/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Simon Budig ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Sven Neumann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Well, we do that already for the alpha channel lock and it doesn't seem to work that badly. Sooner or later we will probably want to add more such toggles. actually the alpha channel lock is a major source of confusion, sometimes even for me. Huh, painting doesn't work. Also it has a different use pattern: Your descision if you need to toggle it depends only on the layer itself. This is - as I explained - very much different from locking the layer completely: Your attention shifts to a different group of layers and you want to toggle this on multiple layers simultaneously. With your proposed solution it would be a major PITA to do this. Maybe a better comparison is the visibility toggle: It would become a major PITA to use if it were a button on top of the dockable. It has a similiar meaning: It controls a single property of a single layer, but is frequently used for multiple different layers at once. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://simon.budig.de/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Hi, Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: With your proposed solution it would be a major PITA to do this. I didn't propose a solution, I only said that moving the toggle elsewhere should be considerd. I am not at all convinced it is a good idea. But then, IIRC, PS does it this way. Since we also want to address layer groups at some point. How does that integrate with locking? Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Hi, for your inspiration, heres a slightly outdated screenshot of the PS user interface for layer locking: http://www.edigitalphoto.com/images/archivesart/0203edp_using_02.jpg This PDF has a lot more screenshots and shows a more uptodate view of the Layers dialog on page 23: http://www.photoshopsupport.com/ib-pdf-02/vqs-chapter01.pdf Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Sven Neumann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: With your proposed solution it would be a major PITA to do this. I didn't propose a solution, I only said that moving the toggle elsewhere should be considerd. I am not at all convinced it is a good idea. But then, IIRC, PS does it this way. Ok, replace proposed solution with suggested placement of the button or whatever. Do you have an example use case where the user would benefit from that placement? The Skencil way of doing it definitely has the issue with clutter in the layer list. I right now have no idea how to avoid this, smaller icons would only help to a certain extent. But IMHO it is important to be able to quickly toggle the locking for multiple layers. Since we also want to address layer groups at some point. How does that integrate with locking? Currently I think that locking the layer group should also lock its children, the same way as making a layer group invisible makes its children invisible. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://simon.budig.de/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] pygimp on windows? success!
lode leroy wrote: Ah, now it starts up, and the Python-fu is there... yippee! It should do so now out of the box, at least in current CVS... maybe except for the interp file, but we should be able to fix this today. And now lets hope some autotools-wizard can deduce from this mail what needs to change... This has been done yesterday by yosh and me. I have to say that I'm surprised that it did work for you, as we had to change the gimpinterpreterdb.c file in order to make it work... Nevertheless, your mail provided some important hints that helped to finally get pygimp part of the regular win32 build of GIMP. So starting with GIMP 2.4, we will have Python as an additional scripting language - one that can probably considered to be more standard than Scheme. Thanks again for your input! If you want to continue to work on scripting, and get even more scripting languages to GIMP on the windows plattform, there is gimp-perl, some java classes, a ruby binding and iirc even something for Tcl... :) Michael -- The 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 http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005, Thorsten Wilms wrote: Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 10:17:46 +0200 From: Thorsten Wilms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 08:19:16PM -0300, Pedro Kiefer wrote: I've just made this mockup (attached) of how the locking mechanism should appear to the user in the layers tab. But that could be wrong, in not really familiar with the GNOME HIG. Clicking in an unlocked lock will lock the layer, clicking in a locked lock will unlock it. I think the lock should be in front of the layer names, right after visibility but before chaining, as it will block the later mechanism. There should be a third state for chaining, showing the symbol halfway faded out or something like that, to indicate it having no effect when the layer is locked. But I'm in doubt if locking is worth the space and additional visual complexity. I believe locking is a necessary feature and I would not like to discourage a developer who is willing to make the effort required to add it. It is better to include the feature then work out how to improve the user interface as needed. If people are concerned about the use of space and visual complexity of the Layers dialog I'd like to suggest a string change (I may have suggested it before though). I'd like to see New Layer shortened to just Layer (once you've created it, aint new no more) and the numbering format changed to simply use N which is more aethetically pleasing to me than the pound/hash/sharp # symbol which I find a little distracting. Turning the Layer label into a Text Area instead of one line Text Entry might also help. Side scrolling can be annoying and if you have Layer preview thumbnails enabled (especially larger ones) there is quite a bit of dead space. Sincerely Alan Horkan Inkscape http://inkscape.org Abiword http://www.abisource.com Dia http://gnome.org/projects/dia/ Open Clip Art http://OpenClipArt.org Alan's Diary http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Missing layer features
On 25.06.2005, at 11:53, Sven Neumann wrote: You could start by making a nice proposal, perhaps including a mockup of how the user interface for this should look like and how it should behave. I guess Pedro has seen the Photoshop interface which does pretty much that (and more). Servus, Daniel PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[Gimp-developer] Re: Layer locking proposal
Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2005-06-26 at 1517.52 +0200): This PDF has a lot more screenshots and shows a more uptodate view of the Layers dialog on page 23: http://www.photoshopsupport.com/ib-pdf-02/vqs-chapter01.pdf Interesting, it shows things on both sides, and one of the front is multipurpose (chain or paintbrush icon). So I wonder how that works, cos the view one can be toggle there, even doing a drag can toggle multiple layers (gimp can not do it, only click click a lot)... but the multipurpose... and what happens in case of multiple modes? So if this is for inspiration, is there someone with access to the program that could do a description of how it looks _and_ how it behaves (showing states, avaliable actions over the controls, etc)? To get the full idea. GSR ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Sven, I did look at the PS user interface for layers before doing the mockup. In the other message you've said: I am sorry, but you can't put the lock at the end of the row. It would become invisible as soon as one layer has a longer name. Couldn't that be solved by ellipsizing the layer name? I really dislike extremeally long layer names, they clutter the interface. I think that we could have both, a check box together with the opacity slider and as a visual aid an small lock that would only disable the lock in the left of the layer list. That way is easy to know which layers are locked, and they are easly unlocked. On Sun, 2005-06-26 at 15:17 +0200, Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, for your inspiration, heres a slightly outdated screenshot of the PS user interface for layer locking: http://www.edigitalphoto.com/images/archivesart/0203edp_using_02.jpg This PDF has a lot more screenshots and shows a more uptodate view of the Layers dialog on page 23: http://www.photoshopsupport.com/ib-pdf-02/vqs-chapter01.pdf Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer -- Pedro Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Hi, Pedro Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I did look at the PS user interface for layers before doing the mockup. In the other message you've said: I am sorry, but you can't put the lock at the end of the row. It would become invisible as soon as one layer has a longer name. Couldn't that be solved by ellipsizing the layer name? I really dislike extremeally long layer names, they clutter the interface. Well, it is up to the user to name the layers and I don't think we should make it harder to use long names. In general it is better to allow list views to scroll horizontally instead of trying to shorten the content to make it fit into the dialog. If we want to have all the lock types that PS offers, we would have to add three new toggles to the layer row. Is that feasible? Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Hi, Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ok, replace proposed solution with suggested placement of the button or whatever. Do you have an example use case where the user would benefit from that placement? Alice and Bob are looking for the layer named Foobar. Due to the introduction of three new toggles in each row of the layer list and the inclusion of the opacity slider (after all it belongs there, doesn't it?), Alice needs to scroll the view horizontally in order to see the layer names. Alternatively she could make the layers dialog a lot wider. Bob uses a different layout. Only the visibility and linked toggles are in the row. The controls for opacity and state of the different locks are placed above the layer list. Bob can easily identify the layer he's looking for w/o having to scroll horizontally. But IMHO it is important to be able to quickly toggle the locking for multiple layers. How is it important? Do you have an example use case? Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
On Sunday, June 26, 2005, 15:17:52, Sven Neumann wrote: for your inspiration, heres a slightly outdated screenshot of the PS user interface for layer locking: Here's how PaintShopPro handles the layers dialog: http://deeperthought.ena.si/misc/psplayers.png The buttons at top are for new raster, vector, art media, mask and layer group, then Delete layer and Edit selection (lets you manipulate selection with drawing tools). The buttons in right dialog pane are: show/hide layer, transparency, blend mode, link (linked layers will be moved together), lock transparency (row 2), group link toggle (row 3), mask overlay toggle (row 4). -- Jernej Simoncic http://deepthought.ena.si/ When a problem goes away, the people working to solve it do not. -- Law of Bureaucracy ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] pygimp on windows? success!
On Sunday 26 June 2005 11:19, Michael Schumacher wrote: lode leroy wrote: Ah, now it starts up, and the Python-fu is there... yippee! It should do so now out of the box, at least in current CVS... maybe except for the interp file, but we should be able to fix this today. Horraayy!!! :-) (...) Thanks again for your input! If you want to continue to work on scripting, and get even more scripting languages to GIMP on the windows plattform, there is gimp-perl, some java classes, a ruby binding and iirc even something for Tcl... :) And there was the guy asking for a Lua interpreter, and I rememeber someone was working on GIMP-C# Michael ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
On Sun, 2005-06-26 at 12:59 -0300, Pedro Kiefer wrote: Sven, I did look at the PS user interface for layers before doing the mockup. In the other message you've said: I am sorry, but you can't put the lock at the end of the row. It would become invisible as soon as one layer has a longer name. Couldn't that be solved by ellipsizing the layer name? I really dislike extremeally long layer names, they clutter the interface. I think that we could have both, a check box together with the opacity slider and as a visual aid an small lock that would only disable the lock in the left of the layer list. That way is easy to know which layers are locked, and they are easly unlocked. As a follow up to my own message, here is another mockup. The lock on the far right of the list would disable the lock for the given layer, so you don't have to change to that particular layer to change it's status. The checkboxs under the opacity slider toggles the different locking mechanisms supported, hence the weird question mark, which should reads as insert_your_own_locking_here. -- Pedro Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] attachment: layer_locking_mockup_2.jpg ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] pygimp on windows? success!
Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: On Sunday 26 June 2005 11:19, Michael Schumacher wrote: If you want to continue to work on scripting, and get even more scripting languages to GIMP on the windows plattform, there is gimp-perl, some java classes, a ruby binding and iirc even something for Tcl... :) And there was the guy asking for a Lua interpreter, and I rememeber someone was working on GIMP-C# Gimp# is actively maintained: http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-sharp/ The Lua interpreter is handled in this bug report: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=171831 Apparently, there is already some code, see comment #12 - yes, I know that's my comment, but I don't have the code. HTH, Michael -- The 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 http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
On Sunday 26 June 2005 13:48, Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Well, it is up to the user to name the layers and I don't think we should make it harder to use long names. In general it is better to allow list views to scroll horizontally instead of trying to shorten the content to make it fit into the dialog. If we want to have all the lock types that PS offers, we would have to add three new toggles to the layer row. Is that feasible? kkk... I thought of three different states for the lock Icon (and a nice tooltip, of course). JS -- Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Hi, Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If we want to have all the lock types that PS offers, we would have to add three new toggles to the layer row. Is that feasible? kkk... I thought of three different states for the lock Icon (and a nice tooltip, of course). Three lock types make up for 2^3 states. Not sure if all of them are useful but it could become difficult to display all useful states in a single icon. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Hi, Pedro Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As a follow up to my own message, here is another mockup. The lock on the far right of the list would disable the lock for the given layer, so you don't have to change to that particular layer to change it's status. The checkboxs under the opacity slider toggles the different locking mechanisms supported, hence the weird question mark, which should reads as insert_your_own_locking_here. I think I don't understand this mockup. So the icon in the layer row (which should really not be at the end for the reason given already) doubles the functionality of the toggles above the list? Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Layer locking proposal
Sven Neumann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ok, replace proposed solution with suggested placement of the button or whatever. Do you have an example use case where the user would benefit from that placement? Alice and Bob are looking for the layer named Foobar. Due to the introduction of three new toggles in each row of the layer list and the inclusion of the opacity slider (after all it belongs there, doesn't it?), Alice needs to scroll the view horizontally in order to see the layer names. Alternatively she could make the layers dialog a lot wider. Actually I pondered about moving the opacity slider and yes, there are good reasons to move it more closely to the layer representation in the layers dockable. The major drawback of course is the necessary screen estate, and I don't think it'd be worth it. The same holds for the mode button. Bob uses a different layout. Only the visibility and linked toggles are in the row. The controls for opacity and state of the different locks are placed above the layer list. Bob can easily identify the layer he's looking for w/o having to scroll horizontally. Sure, if you'd naively extend the layers dialog with more columns it would become wide very quickly. A way to overcome this is to have e.g. two lines per layer. A sample mockup is available at http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/files/layer-dialog-many-properties.png When looking at this mockup the icons are awfully small, they probably need to become bigger, maybe making the layer entry higher. They also interfere with the readability of the layer names which probably can be remedied by sprinkling some design on them. There probably are better ways to layout the additional buttons without making the layer dockable wider. An advantage of these small indicators/toggles is, that we could get rid of the weird indicator for the existance of an alpha channel. Bold vs. Normal Text for the layer name is not very discoverable, a small icon could help (if we don't manage to get rid of the need for this indicator anyway). But IMHO it is important to be able to quickly toggle the locking for multiple layers. How is it important? Do you have an example use case? Actually I already described how I frequently use that feature in Skencil. To protect myself from working accidentially on the wrong layer I tend to lock a lot of layers there. Since my objects of interest usually are distributed among multiple layers I need to lock/unlock multiple layers at once. It were quite painful if I had to move the mouse between two different locations in the dialog instead of moving it from row to row in a sequential manner. There is an important difference between Gimp and Skencil though, which makes it less of an issue for Gimp. In Skencil you by default can operate on all objects in an image, regardless of their association to a layer. So yes, it is more important for Skencil than for Gimp to lock layers. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://simon.budig.de/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
