Hi, On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 12:50 +0200, gg@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Unless what he's implemented is bad why not just comit anyway until you > get around to doing it better/diffeently? I rejected the patch for several reasons, all of them technical: (1) It adds a label for a potentially long string without taking any measure to avoid that the dialog gets too wide due to that. (2) It mixes filenames with strings displayed in the GUI. Filenames can be of a different encoding and therefore need special treatment. In particular you must not call g_path_get_dirname() on the result of file_utils_uri_display_name(). (3) Showing a directory name does only work for local files, it breaks for remote files. > Well it's true it does not seem to do much so it may be best no to build > it if it's been pushed to a future release. Still committing the name > change would not be a bad move since David has coded it. Committing that change would have introduced a string change. We are tentatively string frozen so we will avoid any string changes that are not absolutely needed. The Image Properties dialog only exists because the metadata plug-in is not yet ready for prime time. As soon as the plug-in is considered complete and stable, we won't need the core dialog any longer and the two dialogs can be merged into a single one. > Maybe you dont realise how frustrating and demoralising it is to put in > time to come up with improvements, code and submit patchs only to see them > bounced. Sorry, but I couldn't accept the patches for the reasons given above. And now I have even put more time into this than it has taken David to come up with the patches in the first place. As a general rule, please ask before you write a patch. Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
