Re: [Gimp-developer] gimpfu port to Gimp 3

[Elad Shahar <dawn ever gmail com>]

As far as I know, you are not duplicating effort.

As for a reason to not do it, my (perhaps misinformed) understanding is
that there is a goal to make
gimp not target a specific scripting language; that is to equally support
languages like Javascript, Lua (both of which
have example plugins in /plug-ins/goat-exercises), the same as Python.

If you add a GimpFu module for Python, it wont be available for other
languages. Support for other languages might
call for adding additional GimpFu modules for each, and thus adding more
language-specific maintenance.
To my understanding, this language-specific support is what is being
deprecated.

Maybe a better approach would be to have the GimpFu implemented in C, in a
way that it will be available to all scripting languages.

But Is this language-agnostic approach of significant value? I am hardly
objective, because I love Python,
but Python is crushing it
<https://www.infoworld.com/article/3401536/python-popularity-reaches-an-all-time-high.html>
 .


On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 4:09 PM Lloyd Konneker via gimp-developer-list <
gimp-developer-list gnome org> wrote:

> I started porting gimpfu.py to Gimp 3, Python 3.
>
>
> Is there any reason not to?  Am I duplicating effort?
>
>
> The goal is to support legacy third-party plugins that use gimpfu.
> Requiring minimal syntax changes to legacy plugins.
>
>
> I shared the hacked code at https://github.com/bootchk/GimpFu-v3.
>
>
> My initial testing seems to show that porting gimpfu is doable.  I haven’t
> tried a real legacy plugin yet (e.g. clothify.py)
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:    gimp-developer-list gnome org
> List membership:
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list