Re: [Gimp-print-devel] Recents commits

[Andy T. <th...@ph...>]

Robert L Krawitz wrote:

>  Actually, that's a good point.  It is appropriate for the binary to
> deal with it.  I wasn't thinking too clearly, and reacted out of annoyance.

Annoying - that's the word I was looking for ... ;-)

> I'd actually prefer something like this for other reasons, anyway --
> this would allow someone to define "virtual" printers that are really
> just sets of options.  So someone could define a "printer" that has
> settings appropriate for highest quality printing, another one for
> quick and dirty proofing, others for various groups of settings known
> to work for particular images...

Good point! I'll love this :-)

Andy.