Hi Marc, Marc Lehmann wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 10:20:37AM +0100, Michael Natterer <mitschel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I was (or at least tried to be) very careful not to change any external > > interface (which I suppose you mean by "cause other changes as well") > > with the context changes because playing around with the PDB interface in > > freeze mode looks dangerous to me... > > I'm sorry... do you really say that you won't implement the context stuff > fully for 1.2? > > I had always thought that the work would be finished before 1.2.... I'm not really sure what you mean. The internal stuff is now done only by the context and finished. There are still some (uncritical) things to be done, but that's bugfixing. Do you want to use context functions at the pdb interface? (ie writing stuff like gimp_context_get_brush(NULL)) and put all current color/brush/... access functions to gimpcompat.[ch] or just let all clients run in their own context (which could be done internally without changing the interface) I considered bringing the context to the pdb as a feature for 1.4 (also because I was away from my machine for months when the gimp was frozen :( ) > > So please let me know if you find the semantics of any PDB > > brush/color/pattern/gradient function changed and I'll restore the old > > semantics. > > I don't expect them to be changed yet. I would have appreciated this > very much, this would probably result in much less work on my side (no > backward-compatibility crap). > > If you are about to break the pdb interface we should do it now, not > later. Doing it later is just awkward, resulting in more work from many > others (update it to 1.2, and then to 1.3 again. Doing the major work once > would be much better). Currently I don't plan to break the pdb interface because now the whole stuff is in a sane state. It would be a major api change that will need lots of debugging and I'm not sure if there's enough time until the new release in god-knows-how-many-months ;-) However, putting additional stuff to the context (like the error message as you proposed) wouldn't be too much work. Please let me know what your plans are. bye, --Mitch
