Wed Apr 08, 2015 5:42 am
Wed Apr 08, 2015 6:31 am
Wed Apr 08, 2015 8:06 am
GnuTux wrote:@josephbupe - Not sure this script would meet their standards. They're nit-picky on what goes in.
Wed Apr 08, 2015 9:37 am
Wed Apr 08, 2015 9:50 am
GnuTux wrote:Ok, Maybe I'll do that, Joseph.
Sun Apr 12, 2015 8:56 am
Sun Apr 12, 2015 7:47 pm
josephbupe wrote:GnuTux wrote:@josephbupe - Not sure this script would meet their standards. They're nit-picky on what goes in.
I suggest you start talking to them to get their views than just assuming. Your script works great and could work even better if ported to GEGL.
Regards.
Joseph
GnuTux wrote:Ok, Maybe I'll do that, Joseph.
Mon Apr 13, 2015 6:13 am
Graechan wrote:josephbupe wrote:GnuTux wrote:@josephbupe - Not sure this script would meet their standards. They're nit-picky on what goes in.
I suggest you start talking to them to get their views than just assuming. Your script works great and could work even better if ported to GEGL.
Regards.
JosephGnuTux wrote:Ok, Maybe I'll do that, Joseph.GnuTux how on earth would you port a script to GEGL
"I suggest you start talking to them to get their views than just assuming"
Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:00 am
Mon Apr 13, 2015 8:47 am
jontait2 wrote:You cannot "port" a script to GEGL, but, in many cases, you could re-implement the technique or workflow employed by the script as a GEGL op.
Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:34 am
Issabella wrote:I came a little late to this script GnuTux, thank you for it. I like it a lot. I ran it and added a pattern to them.![]()
![]()
Rod wrote:I believe Tux was referring to this part of the post.Graechan wrote:GnuTux how on earth would you port a script to GEGL"I suggest you start talking to them to get their views than just assuming"
Sun May 03, 2015 1:37 pm
Sun May 03, 2015 2:10 pm
Sun May 03, 2015 3:54 pm
Sun May 03, 2015 6:13 pm
Sun May 03, 2015 6:40 pm
Mon May 04, 2015 5:17 am
Mon May 04, 2015 8:39 am
Mon May 04, 2015 9:43 am
Thank you Mollymolly wrote:Nice Marcello
Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:53 am