alexandre.prokoudine at gmail.com
Mon Apr 24 01:59:19 PDT 2006
On 4/24/06, BERGER Cyrille wrote:
> > 1. How exactly many developers like the idea of having uniform API for plug-ins?
> me :)
That's a good start :)
> From what I can see, from the svn, Qt/KDE is a strong dependency (but
> maybe some digikam/kipi devs can tell more as they surelly know
I'd like hearing from them, of course
> But, anyway, it's the heart of the problem, plugins often require a
> configuration widget, and GTK apps will want a GTK widget and Qt apps
> a Qt widget (and don't forget about wx and fltk ;) ), and we cannot
> ask all plugins devs to provide a widget for all toolkit. (one
> solution would be to provide a xml description of widgets (like Qt's
> ui files) and let the host application transform it to its favorite
> toolkit widget).
I'm not sure what you mean with a configuration widget. Do you mean
> > 3. Is it possible to use same plug-ins (not all, though) for both
> > bitmap and vector graphics?
> I don't know, from what I understand your needs, it's for editing
> bitmap that are imported in inskape, right, or is it to apply a
> filter/effect to the "result" of a vectors drawing ? I do think that
> editing bitmap image and vectorial drawing is a seperated task, and I
> would rather see "a edit this with my favorite bitmap/vectors graphic
> application" (setting wich might or might not be set with portland).
Well, I can easily imagine myself applying Curves to a group of vector
> > 4. Is it possible at all to create a uniform API for plug-ins that
> > could work e.g. in both Krita and GIMP (and with GIMP I mean upcoming
> > GEGL-based GIMP) with regard to color management, bit depth (8/16/32
> > floating point per channel), color spaces etc?
> And I think you forgot at least one question:
> 5] what plugins are to be common ? tools ? filters/effects ?
> colorspaces ? file import/export ? "batch" processing (like
> kipi-plugins) ?
4) and 5) seem to be related, so one answer to all of them. I'm
talking about effects plug-ins like Red-eye Removal, Softglow,
Colorization, Desaturation etc.
> > I believe that having uniform plug-ins API would nicely complement
> > Multilayered bitmap graphics format and non-destructive processing
> > workflow.
> But I am not sure if it's the best time to discuss that, I think we
> need to wait before the integration of Gegl in the Gimp is closed to
> be done, as I expect a lot of change in Gegl's API
Of course, and I'd like to make sure that GIMP's developers stay tuned
from the very beginning, if they like this idea, so that their design
decisions are to benefit all of us ;-)
More information about the CREATE