Talk:Paint.NET

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Free software Portal This article is part of WikiProject Free Software, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve free software-related articles.
B	rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
Low	rated as low-importance on the assessment scale

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Paint.NET article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Is this program dead? The link http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/ is broken. exe 16:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 The program is not dead 2 September 2007 rewrite 3 Title 4 Source Code Change 5 Fair use rationale for Image:Paint-Mono Screenshot.png 6 Timeline

[edit] The program is not dead

The program is not dead it works perfectly. =)

It's currently sitting at their new website:

http://www.getpaint.net/download.html

Sorry for probably messing this page up, as I've never participated in a Talk page before, but is this program vector-based? I don't see any mention of it in the article, or the contrary.

no its a raster image editor. also, someone should make notice of the fact that 3.0 is almost out - Mickiscoole 09:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Mention should be made that it has excellent support for transparency (alpha channel), but no real support for paletted (8-bit etc) bitmaps.

[edit] September 2007 rewrite

I just completed an extensive reword and rework of this article. Please review and post ideas you have for the improvement of the article here. Cheers! =David^(talk)_(contribs) 20:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Title

Paint.Net or paint.net? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 22:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Neither. Its official title, from the program's help menu and title bar, is Paint.NET - a blending of Microsoft Paint and the .NET Framework. Capital P, lowercase aint., capital NET. The article is correctly titled. =David^(talk)_(contribs) 01:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source Code Change

The author(s?) is/are considering not releasing the source code, or not releasing all of the source code, as per this blog post:

http://blog.getpaint.net/2007/12/04/freeware-authors-beware-of-%E2%80%9Cbackspaceware%E2%80%9D/ --CCFreak2K (talk) 19:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

It's just the installer, text, and images. The bulk of the program is still under the MIT license.I Love Pi (talk) 16:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Paint-Mono Screenshot.png

Image:Paint-Mono Screenshot.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline

Is the timeline really necessary. Maybe if it only contained major milestone releases, otherwise it should be remove. It is very impractical in it's current state, an extensive changelog is available here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toehead2001 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Completely agree, no reason for a timeline to take up the majority of the page. I Love Pi (talk) 00:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think NEW FEATURES are acceptable for that section, and I completely agree with the fact that its unnecessary to put too much stuff there. --Colintso (talk) 10:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)