Re: [Inkscape-devel] geometry constructions tool/lpe (plus three questions)
Hi all,
Do we have a decision whether we ship 0.47 with GC tools enabled?
I'd vote for leaving them out. Although it may look like the geometriy tool is just a step from being finished and perhaps it's already of use for some people, some important things still need to be added before it is truly usable. These involve coding on a fundamental level as well as some careful design decisions, and it is likely that this will entail (considerable?) changes in some of the GC LPEs, too. IMHO it would be advisable to not make these in a rush while releasing 0.47.
In this context, I'd once again like to sincerely apologize that my work is still unfinished. Unfortunately, due to sad personal circumstances related to my family it is likely that I won't be able to participate in Inkscape development anytime soon (I can't predict yet how long that may be, I'm afraid), and this post is just a rare occasion since by coincidence I caught a glimpse of Alexandre's question. I will join you again as soon as I can manage, promise! Perhaps I'll be able to do an occasional bug fix during the release process (although frankly speaking I doubt it).
While I'm at it, here is one question and two random comments that occurred to me recently:
1) I seem to recall that there is an online tutorial on scientific poster creation with Inkscape. Does someone happen to have a link at hand?
2) The default value of the "Smoothing factor" in the pencil tool is 4, but this often produces paths with a huge number of nodes. Wouldn't something like 25 or 30 make more sense? BTW, does the number of nodes depend on how quickly the line is drawn?
3) After a fresh installation all lines drawn with the pen/pencil tools have no stroke but are filled, which is very unnatural for freehand lines. On the other hand, the defaults in preferences-skeleton.h are set the other way round. Are these settings discarded, and why?
Best regards and good luck for the release of an awesome 0.47! Max
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Maximilian Albert wrote:
I'd vote for leaving them out. Although it may look like the geometriy tool is just a step from being finished and perhaps it's already of use for some people, some important things still need to be added before it is truly usable. These involve coding on a fundamental level as well as some careful design decisions, and it is likely that this will entail (considerable?) changes in some of the GC LPEs, too. IMHO it would be advisable to not make these in a rush while releasing 0.47.
Which is a pity, but since you know best, I'd rely on your opinion.
In this context, I'd once again like to sincerely apologize that my work is still unfinished. Unfortunately, due to sad personal circumstances related to my family it is likely that I won't be able to participate in Inkscape development anytime soon (I can't predict yet how long that may be, I'm afraid), and this post is just a rare occasion since by coincidence I caught a glimpse of Alexandre's question. I will join you again as soon as I can manage, promise! Perhaps I'll be able to do an occasional bug fix during the release process (although frankly speaking I doubt it).
Are are always welcome to rejoin us whenever you can, trust me on this! :)
While I'm at it, here is one question and two random comments that occurred to me recently:
- I seem to recall that there is an online tutorial on scientific
poster creation with Inkscape. Does someone happen to have a link at hand?
http://www.nabble.com/Making-a-poster-with-Inkscape-td16227277.html, if it's of any help :-/
- After a fresh installation all lines drawn with the pen/pencil
tools have no stroke but are filled, which is very unnatural for freehand lines. On the other hand, the defaults in preferences-skeleton.h are set the other way round. Are these settings discarded, and why?
Check Preferences - Tools - Pencil
Alexandre
2009/4/28 Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...>:
- I seem to recall that there is an online tutorial on scientific
poster creation with Inkscape. Does someone happen to have a link at hand?
http://www.nabble.com/Making-a-poster-with-Inkscape-td16227277.html, if it's of any help :-/
Thanks, I had found that, but I thought there was a "proper" tutorial out there. Perhaps I was mistaken.
- After a fresh installation all lines drawn with the pen/pencil
tools have no stroke but are filled, which is very unnatural for freehand lines. On the other hand, the defaults in preferences-skeleton.h are set the other way round. Are these settings discarded, and why?
Check Preferences - Tools - Pencil
I know how to set the preferences. ;-) (Or did you mean something else?)
I was just wondering why lines drawn with the freehand tools have such a counterintuitive style after a fresh installation (even though the default preferences seem to be OK) - at least as far as I recall, I can't check at the moment.
Max
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Maximilian Albert wrote:
Do we have a decision whether we ship 0.47 with GC tools enabled?
I'd vote for leaving them out.
Just one more question. Are the underlying LPEs worth being shipped with 0.47?
Alexandre
-----Original Message----- From: Alexandre Prokoudine [mailto:alexandre.prokoudine@...400...] Sent: dinsdag 28 april 2009 16:38 To: Inkscape Devel List Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] geometry constructions tool/lpe (plus threequestions)
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Maximilian Albert wrote:
Do we have a decision whether we ship 0.47 with GC tools enabled?
I'd vote for leaving them out.
Just one more question. Are the underlying LPEs worth being shipped with 0.47?
I'm not sure. I had some thoughts about greatly improving their useability as good LPEs on their own (instead of 'just' being useful within the geometry tool). In any case, we should take a close look at them before releasing them (I really don't want to end up with a big heap of LPEs that we have to support for ever).
Ciao, Johan
==>
Just one more question. Are the underlying LPEs worth being shipped with 0.47?
I'm not sure. I had some thoughts about greatly improving their useability as good LPEs on their own (instead of 'just' being useful within the geometry tool). In any case, we should take a close look at them before releasing them (I really don't want to end up with a big heap of LPEs that we have to support for ever). <==
That's exactly what I would have said: Let's wait a bit more but do it properly. Inkscape is not in such a desparate need of new features that it would be worth jeopardizing its reputation for solid development and stability - even less so as there's a bunch of awesome additions for 0.47 anyway.
Max
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 00:24 +0200, Maximilian Albert wrote:
==>
Just one more question. Are the underlying LPEs worth being shipped with 0.47?
I'm not sure. I had some thoughts about greatly improving their useability as good LPEs on their own (instead of 'just' being useful within the geometry tool). In any case, we should take a close look at them before releasing them (I really don't want to end up with a big heap of LPEs that we have to support for ever). <==
That's exactly what I would have said: Let's wait a bit more but do it properly. Inkscape is not in such a desparate need of new features that it would be worth jeopardizing its reputation for solid development and stability - even less so as there's a bunch of awesome additions for 0.47 anyway.
Another +1 here for "no need to put those LPEs in this release, especially since they may need to change a bit when the tool is worked on again". :)
Cheers, Josh
participants (4)
-
unknown＠example.com -
Alexandre Prokoudine -
Joshua A. Andler -
Maximilian Albert