After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 157164 - Allow operations to act on multiple layers
Allow operations to act on multiple layers
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 86337
Product: GIMP
Classification: Other
Component: User Interface
git master
Other Linux
: Low enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: GIMP Bugs
Depends on:
Reported: 2004-11-02 20:12 UTC by Dave Neary
Modified: 2005-04-05 11:45 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Description Dave Neary 2004-11-02 20:12:46 UTC
This report is from Markus Hanauska originally, but I haven't found it, and am
creating as an enhancement request.

It would be nice to be able to select mutiple layers with Ctrl- or Shift-click
in the layers dialog, and then have a certain number of operations act on all
the layers selected. At a minimum, we should be able to move all the layers as
if they were locked, and apply the same filter to all the layers.

Other possibilities would be duplicate and copy, and the usage of the various
tools, but I'm not quite sure how those should behave, and have asked Marcus to
explain a bit more. Perhaps he could do that here.
Comment 1 Sven Neumann 2004-11-02 20:44:23 UTC
You can already move and transform linked layers. Using GAP you can also apply
filters to all layers. I don't think that selection multiple layers in the
Layers dialog is a good idea. It would be better to use layer groups here which
would make this a duplicate of bug #86337.
Comment 2 Sven Neumann 2004-11-06 18:45:29 UTC
Do you agree with my proposal to mark this request as a duplicate of bug #86337 ?
Comment 3 Sven Neumann 2005-01-13 18:56:03 UTC
Marking as NEEDINFO until the question has been answered.
Comment 4 Sven Neumann 2005-04-05 10:55:57 UTC
No response, so I am marking this as duplicate.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 86337 ***
Comment 5 Dave Neary 2005-04-05 11:45:51 UTC
Sorry - for some reason I didn't see this.

I guess this is more or less a duplicate - except that the implementation of
this doesn't necessarily imply implementing layer trees (with layer trees, we
get this one for free, though).

I thought this might be low-hanging fruit. I'm OK with the duplicate label.
Sorry for the delay.