Whither Krita?

[Moritz Moeller]

On 09/20/2009 08:48 PM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Saturday 19 September 2009, Moritz Moeller wrote:
>
>> There is another few posts of mine, in the archives (from 2007, I
>> think), where I already tried advertising these approaches. Might help
>> digging the resp. thread out, to understand better where I'm coming from.
>>   :)
>
> The big problem with this is that it would be a wonderful project, but going
> this way simply means starting completely from scratch. Nothing in the current
> krita codebase will be at all useful (well, maybe some color selectors...).

I think "from scratch" is exaggerating greatly. I made two propsals. One 
is for a node based core.
The other was for procedural bushes.
Neither requires the other to be implemented. Procedural brushes bring 
many advances, even w/o a node-based core.

As for the latter. This would indeed mean replacing the core with a node 
system. I don't know how well abstracted interaction of the core is, for 
any part of Krita making use of it.
But if it was abstraced sufficiently, replacing the core and providing 
backwards compatibility to keep a big chunk of the exisiting code that 
is non-core, should be possible.
Because a layer baed system can easily be expressed in a node-based system.
The reverse is btw not true. Photosop tries hard these days, having now 
smart-objects and cascaded layer groups. But this is still far from the 
flexibility of a node based system.

> And I know that I lack the skills to setup such a project and get it anywhere
> meaningful :-(

Which one? Node-based core or procedural brushes. I can help out with 
how to implement these. I am really sorry that I don't have more time, I 
would love to write a reference implememtation of procedural brushes at 
least.

I can also assure you that neither is any harder to implement than 
anything Krita does currently. :)
A node based core is cretainly a lot of work. Really a lot. Procedural 
brushes aren't

.mm