Michael Natterer wrote:
Actually no. GimpDrawable is a GimpItem is a GimpObject. It should *have* a GeglImage, not be one.
Yes, this is probably correct. Tempbufs should probably also be replaced by GeglImages, and the entire paint core replaced by GeglOp-related operations.
As I see it, GimpImage would contain a GeglNode, rather than inherit from it. There would be a contained GeglNode that would represent the current projection; it would be created from the existing layer & channel lists.
Part of the problem is that GeglNode can represent combinations that the GIMP doesn't support, and adding the UI support for those combinations is (remarkably) nontrivial. Also, there is not a one-to-one correspondence between GeglNodes and GimpLayers (some layers will generate only one GeglNode, others several, especially when layer masks are in use). Relying on "decompiling" the GeglNode to generate the Layers & Channels dialog seems unwise.
Kelly
