Re: [Gimp-developer] Default file name for file-export action

[Mikel Garai <mikel garai eu>]

Hi Jehan,

> > May I suggest leaving it as it is?
> Just for information, nothing is decided yet. That's just a proposition from me.
Yes, I guessed, I just wanted to put some other use-case/requisite in 
the table before any decision was taken.
> Actually Mitch, our maintainer proposed something similar (see
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=712194).
> So we could have a default of IMG_38210-1.jpg for instance.
> This one is fine by me too. Probably even better than "Untitled.jpg"
> actually. Only thing I didn't like was that the default name was
> *exactly* the same as the source in current code. So IMG_38210-1.jpg
> is all good. Close but still different.
Yes, this would maintain my workflow as it is today, as long as it 
contains the original name is some way everything is OK, no usability 
loss there. (in my case with that "-1" suffix could even improve my 
workflow)
> > postpone that change as much as possible. So please, leave the Export path
> > for the "daredevil" users that do not want to be protected from ourselves,
> > you already have the save path with "Save" file actions.
> Also I'd like to note something that you may have already seen on the
> mailing list: there will now be from next release a simplified way to
> close the image without saving: in the quit/close image dialog, you
> can ctrl-d to "close without saving". It means that you can ctrl-w-d
> for instance to close an image instantly without saving to XCF (or
> ctrl-q-d to close the whole GIMP without saving).
> I think that's a very nice change for all the users who use GIMP
> without saving, just like you. :-)
> So you see! You are the target user! ;-)

This feature will be welcome indeed :-)

> > And for Jehan, yes, is kind of weird to use "export" with the default name
> > set to the same of the one opened, but is meant to be "export from gimp"
> > which format is "xcf", so saving to any other format is actually exporting
> > it (if I understood correctly from previous emails in this list)
> It is somehow true. But the "goal" of this distinction is not for the
> sake of the distinction. It has a reason: preventing data
> loss/destructive editing. So if the export dialog proposes by default
> to overwrite the source file, well that's not really following the
> concept, in my opinion.
>
> Jehan
For me, has no change since it already did alert the user with a dialog 
about overwriting, but I'm not against it either, since I already do 
change the name of the file.

Thanks for your attention and considering the needs of non-massive-xcf 
users! (even though I save to xcf when an editing take me more than 20 
min, as I did in pre-2.8 gimps)

Mikel