Hi,
On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 17:29 -0800, Bill Skaggs wrote:
> I have doubts that the Warp tool should be a paint tool at all -- it
> certainly doesn't use a brush.
If it doesn't use a brush, then it is not a GimpBrushTool. It can still,
and probably even should, be a GimpPaintTool.
Sven
__
Hi,
On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 05:13 -0200, Guillermo Espertino wrote:
> Anyway, I'd would like to know why common tasks wouldn't fit there
Yeah, I would also like to know that.
> And finally... a "drag here" sign sounds as a gimmick too for me.
Indeed. In particular since we already found that us
> Will we be able to do "undo" *between* the strokes ?
> * before "Do it"?
> * after "Do it" ? In other words, will the undo stack be updated
> after each stroke ?
After "Do it", yes, definitely.
But before, that is a tough question. In my first patch (which is not
good), each stroke is
> On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 10:11 -0800, Akkana Peck wrote:
> > dialog, which makes the process a lot easier. I've always wished
> > I could have something like [a dialog] for the mode on the current layer,
> > so I could easily try each layer mode sequentially.
Sven Neumann writes:
> Why don't you ju
On Feb 17, 2008 9:18 AM, Tor Lillqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess, in a way the warp tool should be like the transform
> (rotate/perspective/shear) tools. While interacting with it a preview
> is shown. Separate mouse drags are incremental, and just add to the
> in-progress build-up of d
On 16/02/2008, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, the tool class shouldn't do anything but providing the user interface.
I now realize that the non-GUI code for a warp tool does not need to
be very interesting or complicated. One could maybe even just use the
existing displace plug-in
