Other CAD programs haven't solved toponaming issues, they mitigated them. You can still break a model in SW and other commonly used 3D CAD programs, it's just more difficult to do.
386 karma · joined November 5, 2014
Even if true, what does it have to do with anything? :)
Not really, no. They have sufficient funds to hire several developers for several years full-time. They are just dragging their feet to organize themselves into a non-profit and start using those funds. The latest news is that they will probably finally announce a non-profit later this year. Hopefully.
There could be other things that will not make it to FreeCAD at all due to 3rd-party licensing, but it's too early to discuss this. Right now, there are other priorities.
The integrated assembly workbench isn't yet 100% merged to the main FreeCAD development branch, nor are some of the new Sketcher tools.
The website is WIP. You can find screenshots and videos in the blog.
https://ondsel.com/blog/assembly-wb-prerelease/
https://ondsel.com/blog/floating-input-widgets/
https://ondsel.com/blog/ondsel-made-constraining-sketches-fa...
Could you please elaborate? Is this about fast selection of complex and semi-transparent objects (e.g. hair)?
> have rendering glitches in their antialiasing code that gives everything a green tint on my machines
This is a Cairo issue though. See here and further: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/-/issues/8455#note_15219...
The project started under a different name and team in 1998. But it wasn't as active as GIMP until the current project lead discovered and pretty much saved it from slow death around 2002.
What's causing your suspicion?
GIMP 2.99 already handles color spaces better than 2.10. E.g. you already have late binding for CMYK (but not early binding, that's post-3.0 stuff).
There's no telling if layer filters will make it to 3.0, I guess we'll see how much is done at feature freeze time. So I wouldn't be too fast to jump at conclusions, Even if it's missing in 3.0.0, 3.0.2 would have it.
As for HiDPI, the three way switch for canvas zooming suggested by Jehan here — https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/-/issues/5206 — is something I hope they will reconsider. There should be a better way to handle it.
> Does anybody know what is expected to make it into 3.0?
Everything you see in 2.10 point releases (much was backported from 2.99) plus some extras like GTK3 port, multi-layer selection, complete rewrite of linked layers concept, Lua and JS bindings, and various other things. Because of backporting, separating 3.0-specific changes from the rest is not an easy task.
I think there's some distortion added by the Noise Repellent plugin, will look into tweaking settings.
I don't know how these rumours get started but that is simply not true.
GIMP does some things differently and then it does some things the same (because it's just how this type of features work). And then some things were purposefully verbatim-copied from Photoshop (think Heal tool and Perspective Clone tool) because they looked like a good idea.
Personally, I find it incredibly frustrating that this type of conversation always boils down to "If you are asking for explanation why copying Photoshop is good, then you are flat-out refusing to change UI and purposefully making things different".
If you really think that providing substance to argumentation is about tone rather than useful information, then we must be coming from two different planets, and this conversation has no way forward. So I'm sorry, I'll just back out. Seems safer that way. Good luck.
Do they though? I've been in and around that project for many years and one common scenario that I've seen replaying over and over (and over) again is when people request something and then understand "please elaborate why this UI solution is better" or "can't right now, too many things to work on" response as a flat-out refusal.
...while making shape-drawing tools an item in the roadmap? :)
> And go forbid if you criticize that fact in front of them.
Nothing will happen.
On the contrary, it's the first item in search results. The very first one.
As a survivor of "let's have three different ways to apply a TRC curve at the start of the processing pipeline" — hard disagree.
I'm the OP and for the life of me I can't figure out what you are talking about. Seems like you are conflating GIMP and Photoshop and reading the post as if it suggested that either GIMP or Photoshop don't have a menu, which is absurd — there was no such claim.
> Another important thing is to drop the "this must look and feel different than photoshop" stance
There has never been such a stance in the first place. As far as I can recall (which is about 20 years back), the stance has always been "please explain why your proposed change is good, don't hide behind "because this is how Photoshop does it", it's lazy".
"Make it work like in Photoshop because Photoshop" is not appreciated.
It's really _that_ simple.
Oh I dunno. Personally, I was vocally against the bullying of the Glimpse team.
Out of curiosity, what's that? Are you by any chance referring to the option that allows not removing cropped pixels? Well, it's an option. You can disable it.