On Thursday 11 January 2007 13:46, Steve Thompson wrote:
> I guess that about says it all, right? We listen to our users, but
> adjustment layers is a pointless discussion.
You're not listening.
It's pointless because adjustment layer support is already in the roadmap.
Need heard. Need understood. Approach to resolving need defined. Work
toward that end in progress.
What more do you want? You want Sven and company to drop everything else
they're doing in order to implement adjustment layers RIGHT NOW, integrating
this new feature into an architecture that will be immediately abandoned and
replaced as soon as 2.4 is out the door?
Doing what you seem to want will:
1. Delay 2.4
2. Delay the next, GEGL-based version which will...
3. Delay > 8bpc support
4. Delay CMYK support
5. Delay a whole raft of other desireable features
All so that you can have adjustment layers just a bit sooner -- maybe.
Depending on the complexity of implementing adjustment layers in the current
engine, it's entirely possible that you'll get your feature *LATER* than if
you wait for the GEGL-based version!!!
Sheesh. Even as a corporate developer, I'd get pissed off at a manager who
tried to push that kind of stupid decision on me. Why would anyone be
surprised that VOLUNTEER developers would get annoyed at similar pressure
from people that have no authority over them, and are unwilling to help out?
</rant>
Shawn.
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
