[Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.2 and Script-Fu/Tiny-Fu.

[Kevin Cozens <kcozens@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Greetings, all.

In a previous message written by Sven about preparing for GIMP 2.2, he 
wrote the following:

> Script-Fu vs. Tiny-Fu
>
>  We should come to a conclusion whether and how Tiny-Fu can replace
>  Script-Fu. I'd suggest we make separate packages gimp-script-fu and
>  gimp-tiny-fu and remove Script-Fu from the gimp tree.
This issue needs to be discussed now that Sven is trying to get the 
plans for GIMP 2.2 nailed down.

There are several issues here. Should Script-Fu be made a separate 
package outside of the main GIMP source tree? If not, is it time to 
replace Script-Fu with Tiny-Fu in the source tree? Should Tiny-Fu just 
be made a separate plug-in ready to be added to a GIMP install as/when 
scripting is needed?

In regards to Script-Fu vs. Tiny-Fu, I have had little feedback about 
the Tiny-Fu plug-in. I can think of one issue (getting a "No memory!" 
message when too many scripts are installed) that needs to be addressed 
for a GIMP 2.2 release. Other than this one point, I think Tiny-Fu is in 
a state where it could replace Script-Fu.

If it is felt Tiny-Fu isn't (or won't) be ready for 2.2 but would be 
soon after, the best approach may be to make Script-Fu a separate 
plug-in allowing Tiny-Fu to be dropped in later on (either as a separate 
plug-in or as part of the main GIMP package).

Replacing Script-Fu with Tiny-Fu could help push Tiny-Fu along a bit 
(ie. with translations) if it isn't fully ready yet by exposing it to 
more users but what is in the best interest of GIMP and its users?

--
Cheers!

Kevin.  (http://www.interlog.com/~kcozens/)

Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172        |"What are we going to do today, Borg?"
E-mail:kcozens at interlog dot com|"Same thing we always do, Pinkutus:
Packet:ve3syb@ve3yra.#con.on.ca.na|  Try to assimilate the world!"
#include <disclaimer/favourite>   |              -Pinkutus & the Borg