1.5 feature list

[Cyrille Berger]

> > why would this be more risky than executing the script it self ?
>
> A script runs in a sandbox which means it can't reach your files and other
> private stuff.
> Adding a widget in a known dialog makes way for so called social attacks
> and therefor the security barrier of the sandbox has gotten a lot less
> well defined.
> I'm no security expert, but I have seen security alerts based on such
> things.
> You probably will not be convinced this is an issue from my email, but
> please do contact the security experts (dirk a.o.) on this issue before
> krita goes that route.
>
I see what you mean, but I still don't see how a script can do this. Maybe if 
the script give to krita a ui file, it would avoid any problem. But anyway 
it's for Ko 2.0, we have plenty of time to think about it and avoid the 
problem.
(btw it make me think that nothing prevent a script to use the I/O class of Qt 
(or any other librairy) throught Python and Ruby, I will see with sebastian 
what he thinks about that).

> > > I read it to mean that you can show any custom dialog on top of krita
> > > to gather information from the user.
> >
> > And we will end with the same interface as the gimp with a lot of
> > unconsitency.
>
> Well, my offer to go over such guis and beat them into shape still stands,
> and like I said in a previous discussion; no matter what technical things
> you do, developers will always find a way to make rotten UIs. :)

thank you, I will ask your help for FiltersGallery when krita is back on good 
rails :) But, I was thinking about third pary scripts, as krita won't 
probably ships "official" scripts other than example, they are too slow, I 
use them mostly for experimentation and after I reimplement the script in 
C++.

-- 
--- Cyrille Berger ---