On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Olivier wrote:
> 2012/8/6 Anoko :
>> I just want to add I'm also not happy with the new export vs save feature. I
>> use GIMP for all my edit tasks; from complex foto editting to really simple
>> screenshot taking and trimming it slightly. I used to love it for bo
On Aug 7, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Kevin Cozens wrote:
After you have talked with Linus, let us know what he said. :-)
If I recall correctly he claimed that his projects are named after
himself due to his 'egocentricness'. Hence 'Linux' and 'git'
>2012/8/6 Anoko :
>> I've seen the new "you have to use export" messagebox about 20 times now,
>> very annoying ;-). Why is it not OK to allow saving to e.g. png (especially
>> when not using layers!), but keep the export function ALSO as it is? That
>> way, everyone will be happy I think?
>Is
On 07.08.12 at 11:23, Anoko wrote:
2012/8/6 Anoko :
I've seen the new "you have to use export" messagebox about 20 times now, very
annoying ;-). Why is it not OK to allow saving to e.g. png (especially when not using
layers!), but keep the export function ALSO as it is? That way, everyone will
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Anoko wrote:
> GIMP is not the only program I use, so yeah I keep pressing CTRL+S
> thinking that should save whatever I'm editting to whatever file extension
> I gave it, just like in Inkscape, Libreoffice, KDevelop, etc.
Inkscape does it wrong too, and the plan i
* Anoko [08-07-12 05:25]:
> >2012/8/6 Anoko :
>
> >> I've seen the new "you have to use export" messagebox about 20 times
> >> now, very annoying ;-). Why is it not OK to allow saving to e.g.
> >> png (especially when not using layers!), but keep the export function
> >> ALSO as it is? That wa
> Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 11:23:49 +0200
> From: for...@gimpusers.com
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> CC: t...@gimpusers.com
> Subject: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>
>
Well habbits or not, I still wonder why it is explicitly disallowed to
save as something other than xcf. A
> You are "hung up* on a single word, "save" vs "export". Change
your key
> bindings to match what *you* want.
Totally agreed. The
criticism to the new behaviour is quite bureaucratic.
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https
We have found that logic does not apply here. The only allowed interactions
are those approved by the developers.
On 8/7/2012 2:23 AM, Anoko wrote:
2012/8/6 Anoko:
I've seen the new "you have to use export" messagebox about 20 times now, very
annoying ;-). Why is it not OK to allow saving
>Hi!
>Suppose we have a standard QR code composed of hundreds of squares and
>their hundreds of square corners. (e.g.,
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code)
>How can I get Gimp to round all of the internal and external square
>corners - let's say to a 10 pixel radius?
>Thank you.
Using an e
>>Hi!
>>Suppose we have a standard QR code composed of hundreds of squares and
>>their hundreds of square corners. (e.g.,
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code)
>>How can I get Gimp to round all of the internal and external square
>>corners - let's say to a 10 pixel radius?
>>Thank you.
Oh,
>> You are "hung up* on a single word, "save" vs "export". Change
>your key
>> bindings to match what *you* want.
>Totally agreed. The
>criticism to the new behaviour is quite bureaucratic.
I'm not sure how this remark helps the discussion (nor the other personal
remarks about developers in ot
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Anoko wrote:
> I do not see why this is solved. Someone who is not familair with GIMP, that
> wants to store something as a png file, clicks save, finds it needs to
> export, clicks export and has lost their layered data nevertheless, now
> basically without a wa
>On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Anoko wrote:
>> I do not see why this is solved. Someone who is not familair with GIMP, that
>> wants to store something as a png file, clicks save, finds it needs to
>> export, clicks export and has lost their layered data nevertheless, now
>> basically without
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Anoko wrote:
> However, I do not understand why no one discusses a compromise
> that does neither enforce nor burden exporting.
The secondary workflow _is_ the compromise.
> Are the developers really willing to give up a "part" of their users for
> something whic
>On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Anoko wrote:
>> The explanation page says "In other words, GIMP used to assume
>> that you don't mind accidental loss of unrecoverable project data and
>> bothered you with confirmation dialogs. It was a convoluted logic,
>> but people got used to it."
>>
>> I do
> I suspect though that you have misunderstood my use case.
>
>User: lets say he wants so save image with transparance as jpg, clicks save
>Gimp: you have to use export
>User: Export to jpg
>Gimp: ok! (no message that transparance got lost)
>User: click exit
>Gimp: Sure? not saved!
>User: uh, I jus
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Anoko wrote:
> I understand that you are bored of the discussion, but by
> suggesting that it is my problem alone of seeing it wrong,
> I think that's a bit insulting and really unnecessary.
Well, what if it _is_ your problem alone? I could wrap that up in a
cheer
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Rob Antonishen wrote:
> And this is where your use case is wrong! The whole point of separating save
> and export is that ONLY save is "safe". An export is NOT guaranteed to be
> either safe or lossless. It may be, depending on the source image. Your
> example e
[..]
>>User: uh, I just exported it, oh yeah right exporting is not saving. But it's
>>exported, so my changes are safe. Agree!
>And this is where your use case is wrong! The whole point of
>separating save and export is that ONLY save is "safe". An export is
>NOT guaranteed to be either safe or
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Anoko wrote:
> Its wrong because users don't think that way?
What users? :)
The are no "users in general". There are all sorts of workflows and
uses for applications. There are all kinds of users too.
The kind of users we are targeting, mostly understand and acce
On 08/07/2012 04:59 PM, Anoko wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Anoko wrote:
The explanation page says "In other words, GIMP used to assume
that you don't mind accidental loss of unrecoverable project data and
bothered you with confirmation dialogs. It was a convoluted logic,
but people
On 08/07/2012 05:52 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
The usability team spent quite a while writing all the reasoning down
at gui.gimp.org. I don't really understand why we need yet another
long thread to go through all these things yet again.
Alexandre Prokoudine
Alexandre,
IMHO the answers
On 08/07/2012 05:32 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Rob Antonishen wrote:
And this is where your use case is wrong! The whole point of separating save
and export is that ONLY save is "safe". An export is NOT guaranteed to be
either safe or lossless. It may be,
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
> IMHO, the "loss of data" situation that the developers were trying to
> prevent with this change was not serious problem for the Gimp target user
> group (advanced users). I doubt those advanced users were having a problem
> before this change.
> [..]
>>>User: uh, I just exported it, oh yeah right exporting is not saving. But
>>>it's exported, so my changes are safe. Agree!
>
>>And this is where your use case is wrong! The whole point of
>>separating save and export is that ONLY save is "safe". An export is
>>NOT guaranteed to be either
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
> As many husbands have taken decades to learn (or else they are no longer
> married), sometimes "writing all the reasoning down" won't make the wife
> feel better. Right now, the developers are responding to an emotional
> situation by saying some
Alexandre,
Just because you write something down doesn't make it right.
Mein Kampf comes to mind.
On 8/7/2012 2:52 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Anoko wrote:
Its wrong because users don't think that way?
What users? :)
The are no "users in general".
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
> However, to me, the XCF does not _currently_ really save what I consider to
> be the _project_ data.
>
> Gimp does not save, to my knowledge (please excuse any errors), the
> following (and more, I am sure):
>
> - window positions or sizes
> - vis
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Ken Warner wrote:
> Alexandre,
>
> Just because you write something down doesn't make it right.
>
> Mein Kampf comes to mind.
Ken,
Your unwillingness to try understanding the text you are commenting on
is amusing, but doesn not really encourage a constructive
On 08/07/2012 06:53 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
As many husbands have taken decades to learn (or else they are no longer
married), sometimes "writing all the reasoning down" won't make the wife
feel better. Right now, the developers are resp
On 08/07/2012 07:11 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
However, to me, the XCF does not _currently_ really save what I consider to
be the _project_ data.
Gimp does not save, to my knowledge (please excuse any errors), the
following (and more, I am
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
> In return, I got back a dismissive reply
You didn't :)
> that IMHO completely ignored the
> intent of what I was trying to say.
If I skip some bits, it doesn't mean that I don't read them or
disagree. It also can mean that I agree and merely re
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Ken Warner wrote:
> So you acknowledge that your developer's design decisions might be wrong?
Ken,
This is not a perfect world where perfect people make perfect decisions.
I really wish you stopped making monsters out of us.
Everyone can be wrong. We cannot possi
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Ken Warner wrote:
> Your opinions need moderation and you need to be more inclusive rather than
> exclusive.
This is our mailing list. It's not up to you to decide what needs
moderation here.
> The preferences of the developers should always be secondary to the
>
On 8 Aug 2012 07:24, "Jay Smith" wrote:
>
> In summary, IF nearly every one of the developers responses included some
version of the following statement, nearly half of your "long threads"
would vanish and life would be good:
>
>
> "We understand _ presents a difficult situation for some
>
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:47 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> None of the developers gain anything if you use their software, nor do they
> lose anything if you don't.
This is not entirely correct. We gain recognition from publicity when
someone does great work available in public. Recognition of
achievemen
37 matches
Mail list logo
