Here is something strange.I can get the plug-in to work in Gimp-2.7.3 but not in Gimp-2.6.11.
Weird, as i have them both in their respective plug-in folders.

Rod, did you by some chance stroke the resulting path instead of activating it and filling it?

I'm using gimp v2.6.11.

My problem is that i can not get the plug-in to show on right click in the paths dialog but i can in gimp-2.7.3

I don't know if you have to do anything in Windows to make a plug-in executable. In Linux I have to right-click the plug-in, Permissions tab, and check the box to make it show up and work.

Works fine for me: GIMP 2.6.11 and Windows-XP SP3.
Now I just need to find some time to play with it.

O, Rod runs Windows-XP and you don't need to set permissions in XP.
Don't know about Vista or Windows 7.

OK, that's good to know. Thanks!

In case someone else is having trouble having it show up, there must be a path in the Paths window.

I have put the path script into plugins and taken it out and download a new one several times. I made an elipse, saved it to path, unselected, activated the path selection, right clicked it and there is no decorate Periodic wave in the menu. I also rebooted Gimp 3 times and my pc once. still doesn't show. grrrrrrr

I made and ellipse, saved it as a path and right clicked on the path:

Do you have the python-fu support? (best way to check: there is a python-fu item in the Filters menu, right next to script-fu). And remember that Python scripts are really *plugins*, so they must be in the "plugins" directory, not in the "scripts" one.

Yes I have all my python scripts in the plugin folder. I do have python-fu. several other scripts work in it, including fog etc......

Start gimp-console and see if you get any error messages on startup. Or download the file again but don't open it in any editor, since this can mess the indenting and the python interpreter is very picky about it.

I closed Gimp, reopened it, no errors. I put the script in without using editor. still no luck.....

Gimp 2.6.11 in Windows 7 64 bit

ok I am on a mission now...I have never been sure that anything I have in the python world is working and now I dont really think they are, even though I think they are in the right place...this one is definitely not working...

Only played a little with it, but it works fine in 32-bit GIMP 2.6.11 (in Win7). Have not tried it in 64-bit GIMP 2.7.3 yet. Anyway, thanks Ofnuts.

Since some of you seem to have a lot of fun with it, I uploaded a version 0.1 to Sourceforge. It adds ellipse and circle arcs. Circles remain circular, the "width" has no effect on them, but the asymmetry setting behaves somewhat differently from other shapes.

I've also added a print statement that confirms that registration is OK (have to use Gimp-console or start from a command prompt in Linux to see it).

Has any Windows-er tried to see if Gimp will output its messages to file (ie, from a command prompt, use:
... and see of there is something in /some/file.log after Gimp ends?

Philosophical question: what is best:

• the current scheme when several menu entries are registered.
  
  • Pros:
    
    • Options dialogs can be differents
    • Options are saved per shape
  • Cons:
    
    • Menu structure complexity
    • Common options have their use when creating several
      paths to combine them.
• the opposite scheme with only a "Periodic wave..." in the menu (no submenu) and a "Shape" choice in the options dialog.

Any more suggestions before I make it a bit more public (Gimp registry)?

Makes interesting bumpmaps...

Loaded the new version, here is the log file.
Windows XP, Gimp 2.6.11

The log file for the previous/initial version of path-waves was virtually empty.

I like the current scheme of multiple menu entries IF the dialogs are different.

does anyone think it will run in Mac OS??? because I am at a loss with this one atm

I believe Oregonian found why for many the script doesn't show up:
usually there is no any path in the path window, and is not expected have to create a path for a script to show up in the menu

So Akky and Molly, FIRST create a path, than the script should become visible

@ Ofnuts
Obviously your script script strictly require a path,but would be better if the script would be visible anyway in the menu, even if grayed out, or popping out error messages as " the script require a path, create a path and try again" or something alike

PS
ofnuts in general don't like much working with path but i really like the results i seen from your scripts,

I have no control over that. If the script is registered in the <Vectors> menu, it is under the control of that menu, and, by the way, on my 2.6.8/Linux, the menu entry shows up even id there are no paths...
And this is really where the script belongs.
Paths are quite fun to work with, and the key to a more professional look in many cases. But they obviously get less care from the average Gimp developer than other more visible bitmap processing.