On 08.08.2013 at 10:00 P.M., Jay Smith wrote:
This is open-source software. You are welcome to become a developer,
fork the project, and do all this yourself or you can build a team to do
it. Or you can hire people to do it for you. But asking the developers
-- all volunteers -- to increase t
Sorry to be bugging you with this! I was unable to figure out bugzilla
(>v_v<)...
I believe I found a bug in GIMP:
When using the text function, the highlight, bold, and underline
commands won't work.
And when I use the larger editor for text, I am unable to increase size,
make italics, bold,
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Jeffrey K wrote:
> Sorry to be bugging you with this! I was unable to figure out bugzilla
> (>v_v<)...
>
> I believe I found a bug in GIMP:
>
> When using the text function, the highlight, bold, and underline commands
> won't work.
> And when I use the larger editor
I add my vote on this one.
XCF is a gimp only format, and unfortunately the world don't run on it.
When really working on a pic, this one needs ( by nature ) to be exported and
imported, and sometimes many times in a project. Of course when you draw in
gimp, for gimp and nothing else ( no need to
>Second!
>
>I for one appreciate what the GIMP developers have worked so hard to
>produce. Spectacular program for the price!
>
>Stuart Rauh
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: gimp-user-list [mailto:gimp-user-list-boun...@gnome.org] On
>Behalf Of Patrick Shanahan
>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:42 PM, pitibonom wrote:
> EDIT: amazing the captcha of this posting window is 'dictatorship' :D a subtle
> message ? ;-)
Wait till you get "handcuffs" or "ball and chain" :)
> so as a conclusion you mean that because it's free, it's allowed to be not
> functionnal. Am i
Finally am wondering wether there's still a branch of the 2.6 version that is
active ?
Does anyone know ?
Or is there only the standard current 2.8.x trunc ?
Of course for ppl who don't like the 2.8, noone forces them to use it, but then
the question is asked about the older versions.
Is there even
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:59 PM, pitibonom wrote:
> Finally am wondering wether there's still a branch of the 2.6 version that is
> active ?
There's no such thing to the best of my knowledge.
> Is there even the possibility to download the old 2.6 somewhere ?
Yes, of course.
> Ah it seems yes, b
>Wait till you get "handcuffs" or "ball and chain" :)
>You are.
>Because we choose to work on it.
>As if we didn't know :)
>
>Alexandre Prokoudine
>http://libregraphicsworld.org
really amazing Alexandre, the feeling you give me that am speaking to some kind
of deity :D
Mebe in your supreme knowled
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:07 PM, pitibonom wrote:
> really amazing Alexandre, the feeling you give me that am speaking to some
> kind
> of deity :D
Would you like to repent while at that? :)
> Mebe in your supreme knowledge and power you could convince other companies
> like
> unity, adobe, mic
When i started 50 years ago in the early days of IT as prof was me told
that there are 2 rules for program developers : first keep it simple
and second the user must be happy with the results of your work.
In the endless discussion of export vs. Save i believe that the second
rule is violated.
s.kortenweg (s.korten...@hccnet.nl) wrote:
> When i started 50 years ago in the early days of IT as prof was me
> told that there are 2 rules for program developers : first keep it
> simple and second the user must be happy with the results of your
> work.
Compared to 50 years ago there has been
On 08/09/2013 12:42 PM, pitibonom wrote:
It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded. Load a
jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg
format ( though it degrades the image quality at each save, but this is another
question ) is red
>s.kortenweg (s.korten...@hccnet.nl) wrote:
>Compared to 50 years ago there has been a drastic change however:
>Typically there is more than one user per program...
>
>Bye,
>Simon
Exact, things changed. We were able to have a better use of our softwares, of
our possibilities on computers,
On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 21:02 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:
> On 08/09/2013 12:42 PM, pitibonom wrote:
> > It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded.
> > Load a
> > jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg
> > format ( though it degrades the
On 08/09/2013 09:09 PM, Daniel wrote:
On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 21:02 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:
On 08/09/2013 12:42 PM, pitibonom wrote:
It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded. Load a
jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg
format (
First off, I have been using Gimp ever since 0.9.something, it's still
my most used GNU/Linux desktop application, and I did quite some cursing
the very day the new save/export behaviour was introduced - but mainly
because, in the end, it broke a workflow I was used to.
Am 09.08.2013 21:09, schri
Either way, this is a much more civil argument then "you developers are
doodieheads for not doing it my way" aka the way this thread started in
the first place.
On 8/9/2013 1:44 PM, Ofnuts wrote:
On 08/09/2013 09:09 PM, Daniel wrote:
On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 21:02 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:
On 08/
This thread is like a wound that won't heal - I keep picking the scab even
though I know I should just let it be.
For me, it seems that there are well-established precedents for this type of
situation, and in general it would be better to follow precedent where
reasonable. It's generally bette
On 08/09/2013 01:30 PM, pbft wrote:
> This thread is like a wound that won't heal - I keep picking the scab even
> though I know I should just let it be.
>
> For me, it seems that there are well-established precedents for this type of
> situation, and in general it would be better to follow pre
20 matches
Mail list logo
