[CREATE] gbr brush format bumped

Wed Mar 14 06:11:50 PDT 2007

On Wednesday 14 March 2007 09:29, Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote:
> Am 14.03.07, 08:25 +0100 schrieb Sven Neumann:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 08:37 +0100, Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote:
> > > Therefore the GBR brush format is bumped to version 4. Is this
> > > version of GBR allready in use or still free?
> >
> > The GIMP Brush format (GBR) has never been free for extension by
> > other projects. We have asked the Cinepaint developers several
> > times to use their own format instead of doing incompatible
> > changes to the GBR format. When the last change had happened, we
> > bit the apple and adopted
>
> CinePaint inherited this format from the Gimp code base.
> So your claim is not valid or at least difficult.
>
> Back to the topic:
> All the question is about whether the GBR format version 4 is used
> by an other application or not.

Excuse-me - 
I believe this question has been answered: while the "version 4"  is 
not in use, the Gimp project does consider that "Gimp BRushes"  
remains a file format available to this application.

Let's think this way: what would be the consequences if this format 
numbering would be in use by naother app, as you arfe asking? 
Answer: there would eb the stong possibilitlyt of "gbr"  fils beng 
vailable on web repositories that wouldbe downloaded and not work in
cinepaint.

This is the exact sort of situation GIMP developers want to avoid.
If there are .GBR fiels that arew incompatible witht he GIMP 
application on the net, pepolpe would donwload those, and wonder why 
they would not work.

Changing a a bit int he magic number, and the file extension to "cbr", 
or any other, would avoiuid these confusion, and is in no way 
soemthing so disastrous as you imply. 

Anyone ever finding a "cbr"  file would know it is meant to be used 
with cinepaint.

As with the people claiming it is a "good thing to apps to share brush 
formats" - indeeed, I fully agree. But __please__ note tha what is 
going on here is a one sided changing of a file format that was 
created by another application in first place.

For krita developers the sitautionm is exactly this: I fork Krita - 
allright. I enhance certain of its abilities - ok. I make 
incomplatible chanegs to the .kra file format i n my app, and still 
name it .kra. NFor my own app conveninece, I bump the version number 
in these .kra files, and ask on a mailing list i "is teh nrew .kra 
version number in use ? We will use it in an incompatible way 
withother apps in our next version! Thanks".

Now if you think that is nice, and the best way to go, instead of 
simply renaming the file extension to another thing, so ok, go on and 
defend the GBR v4  as presented here.

This is at the bare minimum a "embrace and extend"  pratice, to put it 
in famliar terms.

>
> > the GIMP brush loader code to handle the changed format. But
> > please don't do this mistake again. Please change the file
> > extension and the file header and create your own brush format.
>
> With respect to the project you lead,
> I did not do a mistake related to this toppic in the past. As well
> I dont consider the changes to the format a mistake than a
> necessity.
>
> There is technically too less changing as reason for a complete new
> format. A renaming would not decrease possible confusion.
> What other benefit should such format bring?

Yes, it would. I think I will have to repeat myself, but mybe mroe 
exmaples make it mroe clear.
User navigates to web brush repository. He sees a folder with ".gbr"  
brushes - e thinks "ah - these work in both cinepaint and GIMP", and 
downloads then, just to find out they do not work under GIMP. Worse, 
if in the future, GIMP makes it'sown enhancemtetn s to the format, 
even if the ersion "4"  is not used, tehr emight be, int he same 
folders, files that would work in an app, an dnot in another.

If instead, even thoguht the itnernal format wuld be quite close 
to .gbr, tehre where a web folder with .gbr's and another one 
with .cbr's the user would know which would work in either app.

So, again, since you care to ask, the answer is "no, the .GBR format, 
either version 4, or others, is not considered as available for being 
re-specified by other apps by the developers of the Gnu Image 
Manipulation Program".

You are looking quite stubborn, and I don't see you changing our mind, 
evne thought there are overwhelming reasons to do so.  So please, 
pick teh above answer, and paste where apropriate in your project 
documentation. Also do provide documentation on teh new format, and 
at least link it to this list. 

	js
	-><-

> regards
> Kai-Uwe Behrmann
> --
> development for color management
> www.behrmann.name + www.oyranos.org + www.cinepaint.org
>