The biggest first step would be to define the package xml syntax. After that, resource types could be added. I agree that only scripts, binaries, and python plugins would make sense to package this way. Anything needing compiling would be out of scope. -Rob A> On 5/14/10, Alexia Death <alexiadeath@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Akkana Peck <akkana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Martin Nordholts writes: >>> On 05/14/2010 04:13 PM, Rob Antonishen wrote: >>> > - GIMP should be easily extensible by the average user: one >>> > click-installation of plug-ins >>> > [...] >>> >>> I agree installation of plug-ins is a pain, but I'm not aware of anyone >>> planning to work on improving the situation. >> >> Writing a file handler like Rob describes sounds easy -- if all you >> care about is script-fu. The hard part would getting Python and C >> plug-ins installed for users (especially Windows users) who don't >> have Python, PyGTK or a C compiler. > > This file handler should also be able to handle all other resources > gimp has like brushes, patterns, dynamcs, tool presets etc. Its been > considered for a long time and If my time wasnt aready booked full I > would look into it myself. > > > > -- > --Alexia > _______________________________________________ > Gimp-developer mailing list > Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer > -- Sent from my mobile device _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
