whither krita -- summary

[Cyrille Berger]

On Thursday 24 September 2009, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Thursday 24 September 2009, Cyrille Berger wrote:
> > I am not aiming at making krita easy to learn, but rather on ease of use.
> 
> I think we intend the same -- all the same, currently our layer menu
>  threatens to drop below my plasma panel.
I will let you count how many different way you have to make a new layer :) We 
need to make cuts in that menu. I would be tempted to move all the transform 
business (rotate, shear, mirror...) in the transform tool (it's the koffice 
intereaction model after all). Maybe the metadata could be merged with 
properties. I would also merge layer and mask menu, most of the entry are the 
same, and we could just disable those that don't apply.

> > Well, we were mentioing fud :)
> 
> I'd say part ignorance, part being informed.
Lets fix ignorance ! with our website :)

> > kparts isn't a running service, kdeinit is mostly used to preload
> >  libraries, that would be loaded anyway. That leave kded.
> 
> And dbus.
Yeah most unixes have a running dbus. More a problem on windows/mac osx but I 
think I heard some discussions on making it optional for windows/mac osx.

> > Maybe we need a FAQ:
> > "What I most dislike, is the need to install kde office suite to have it"
> > No you don't.
> 
> Our faq disappeared, too, didn't it, with the website reform?

most likely, but it's more a matter of having it back, way or an other.

> > > And, actually, the services a kde needs to have running mean that it's
> > > very unlikely that there will ever be a krita installer for windows or
> > > a krita dmg for OSX.
> >
> > hum we have that for windows. I just think that those platforms need
> > love.
> 
> Do you mean the kde-windows installer?
yes.

> Because I don't think that really
> counts. It's not an installer for Krita, so it weirds out everyone who
>  doesn't know about the linux way.
I don't think it is that hard to hide all the complexity, like having 
preselected krita and skip all the mess of packages selection. It shouldn't be 
even hard to have an .exe that ship with all the "packages". Even if nowdays, 
setup.exe that go on internet to download the software is very common.

> > Well we have some good UI concept as well, like the filter "class", the
> >  paintop "class" and tool "class", I think we more have a problem of
> >  uniformity, most paintop widgets seems different from one an other.
> > Filter aren't really better.
> 
> That's a good  point.
Could be good to define UI guidelines, and then have code to support that.

-- 
Cyrille Berger