|
View:
New views
6 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
|
|
Question on mode grouping in 2.8I read that the layer modes are being grouped differently in 2.8 (from
gimpusers.com - "Layer modes have been grouped by context for easier use. For example, all modes that darken/brighten the image are arranged together now.") Is this just a UI change, or is the enum value changed as well? Specifically, will scripts that reference layer modes using numbers rather than the enums get broken by this? (I am a script writer, not a developer, so I do not have enough actual exposure/experience with the gimp code to even know where to look for myself...) Thanks- Rob A> _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@... https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer |
|
|
Re: Question on mode grouping in 2.8Moin!
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 19:17, Rob Antonishen<rob.antonishen@...> wrote: > I read that the layer modes are being grouped differently in 2.8 (from > gimpusers.com - "Layer modes have been grouped by context for easier > use. For example, all modes that darken/brighten the image are > arranged together now.") As far as I know there was no change since Gimp 2.0. This is a wrong information from gimpusers.com. Regards, Tobias _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@... https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer |
|
|
Re: Question on mode grouping in 2.8On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 19:36 +0200, Tobias Jakobs wrote:
> Moin! > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 19:17, Rob Antonishen<rob.antonishen@...> wrote: > > I read that the layer modes are being grouped differently in 2.8 (from > > gimpusers.com - "Layer modes have been grouped by context for easier > > use. For example, all modes that darken/brighten the image are > > arranged together now.") > > As far as I know there was no change since Gimp 2.0. This is a wrong > information from gimpusers.com. No, the information is right, the menu was reordered. The layer mode enum was of course not changed. ciao, --mitch _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@... https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer |
|
|
Re: Question on mode grouping in 2.8Thanks all, for the confirmation and clarification.
-Rob A> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Michael Natterer<mitch@...> wrote: > On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 19:36 +0200, Tobias Jakobs wrote: >> Moin! >> >> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 19:17, Rob Antonishen<rob.antonishen@...> wrote: >> > I read that the layer modes are being grouped differently in 2.8 (from >> > gimpusers.com - "Layer modes have been grouped by context for easier >> > use. For example, all modes that darken/brighten the image are >> > arranged together now.") >> >> As far as I know there was no change since Gimp 2.0. This is a wrong >> information from gimpusers.com. > > No, the information is right, the menu was reordered. > > The layer mode enum was of course not changed. > > ciao, > --mitch > > > Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@... https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer |
|
|
Re: Question on mode grouping in 2.8On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 19:47, Michael Natterer<mitch@...> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 19:36 +0200, Tobias Jakobs wrote: >> Moin! >> >> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 19:17, Rob Antonishen<rob.antonishen@...> wrote: >> > I read that the layer modes are being grouped differently in 2.8 (from >> > gimpusers.com - "Layer modes have been grouped by context for easier >> > use. For example, all modes that darken/brighten the image are >> > arranged together now.") >> >> As far as I know there was no change since Gimp 2.0. This is a wrong >> information from gimpusers.com. > > No, the information is right, the menu was reordered. Oh, sorry. I must have missed that. Regards, Tobias _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@... https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer |
|
|
Re: Question on mode grouping in 2.8On 09/07/2009 07:49 PM, Rob Antonishen wrote:
> Thanks all, for the confirmation and clarification. For reference, here is the gimp-developer thread leading up to the rearrangements: http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-developer/2008-November/thread.html#21099 / Martin -- My GIMP Blog: http://www.chromecode.com/ _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@... https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |