Your tone, sucks, as always. It sucks so much that I ask you to leave us alone in the future. Please go away. --mitch On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 15:33 +0100, Cedric Sodhi wrote: > As I've been asked, I'll just quote what I already submitted to > bugzilla, minus the typos: > > I see no use in non-icremental paiting. It appears to exist only because > it was easier to implement than normal painting, which does not work > properly, as I've filed in at least one other bug report. > > Not only should incremental paiting urgently be fixed, as described > there, but non-incremental painting, or the option to choose between the > two, should be removed as a whole. > > If anyone can think of a usecase where that non-intuitive, unpredictable > painting mode is actually useful, please prove me wrong. > > Until then, I interpret the mere existance of that painting mode as an > excuse to not admit one of the most serious flaws in gimp with regard to > painting. > > To be blunt, as long as there is no way for a painter to properly > anticipate the color in which he draws unless he draws in short, > non-self-overlapping strokes (which, admittedly, is typical for > water-color et al), gimp may be a powerful graphics-editor but remains > nothing but a toy for painting (and all efforts related to painting such > as providing well-designed presets remain futile). > _______________________________________________ > gimp-developer-list mailing list > gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
