Tino Schwarze wrote:
After all, I got around to test it. Though the patch got a bit messed
up
by sending it via mail, I managed to apply it. It works. At least,
I
checked that selecting a layer within LC does indeed change the
active
layer indicated within the image.
Ibelieve the patch fixes
Manish Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How about --enable-stack-trace=[yes/no/query] and set it to query by default.
We'll set the default to no for stable releases.
This should just set the default setting that gimp uses at runtime. There
should be runtime options that parallel to
On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 12:03:43PM -0500, "Garry R. Osgood" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the record, I think a plug-in CVS tree independent of Gimp is a good idea.
"Let's focus, people!"
At the time this was discussed, the office of a "plugin-maintainer" was also posed,
I don't think this is
From: Dean Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 16:00:23 -0600 (CST)
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Garry R. Osgood),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gimp Developer's Newslist)
Marc Lehmann spontaneously blurts out:
Failing that, I will set up a gimp server on a local
On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 04:00:23PM -0600, Dean Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Failing that, I will set up a gimp server on a local machine (in germany),
but I can't promose that (I iwll need to find a free disk, but maybe in
one or two weeks I can spare 2GB for it).
This has
For the record, I think a plug-in CVS tree independent of Gimp is a good idea.
"Let's focus, people!"
[snip]
The issue is: who has the time? Without people, good ideas remain abstract.
I have no time, but I would nevertheless devote part of on merges between
the two cvs trees. I
Hmm... sounds sensible. Unless somebody comes up with something better
I'll start it in a week or so.
My idea is to copy the full cvs tree of gimp to (lets call it gimpforge)
and give any intersted plug-in author write access.
Updates from the gimp-cvs-tree/{libgimp,app,tools...} to
Marc Lehmann spontaneously blurts out:
Hmm... sounds sensible. Unless somebody comes up with something better
I'll start it in a week or so.
My idea is to copy the full cvs tree of gimp to (lets call it gimpforge)
and give any intersted plug-in author write access.
Updates from the
getting this error when compiling 'install' ..
Making install in app
/bin/sh ../mkinstalldirs /usr/local/bin
/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=install .././install-sh -c gimp
/usr/local/bin/gimp
.././install-sh -c gimp /usr/local/bin/gimp
cc -g -std1 install.c -o install
cc: Severe: gdk/gdkx.h,
On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 07:17:31PM -0500, Federico Mena Quintero
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People should feel free to ask for a CVS account on the cvs.gnome.org
box. If they have something cool they are working on for the GIMP, we
As a matter of fact, it is very difficult ot get a cvs
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 03:29:53PM +0100, Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 01:52:40AM +0100, Sven Neumann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I won't unless someone tells us what he thinks is broken.
Well, telling "us" about it didn't help in the past, so why should it
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 04:10:46PM -0500, Michael Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It looks like I've missed the deadline for another version of GIMP. I
read that people are concerned about the number of plug-ins currently
shipping with the GIMP. I have previously tried to elicit an opinion
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Marc Lehmann wrote:
So what? Sven obviously has not enough time to care for everything in
the Gimp. Critical bugs in Script-Fu have not been fixed for over a
year, despite a considerable number of good bug-reports.
That is VERY vague. What are these 'critical bugs'?
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Marc Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 11:05:35AM -0500, Glyph Lefkowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Since the only advantage of this is the stack-trace for non-developers,
The consensus was to remove it in release versions. So if the only advantage
On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 11:30:05AM -0500, Kelly Lynn Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PLUGIN_MAINTAINERS is just a file... fatc is that bugs _do_ _not_ _get_
_fixed_, so script-fu is basically unmaintained.
You could, of course, fix them yourself. :)
As a matter of fact, I couldn't. Why do
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 20:53:30 +0100, Marc Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
As a matter of fact, I couldn't. Why do you think I could?
Anybody can do anything, with enough effort. :)
Kelly
If re-reporting the bug is so painful that you can't do it
It is so painful because I re-reported it at least three times (so many
mails are in my saent-folder, but I know I sent more that got lost during
a crash).
They are not SO critical that I have been unable to use script-fu
They are
17 matches
Mail list logo
