Bug 425585 - Take layer state into account in the undo history
Summary: Take layer state into account in the undo history
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 389876
Alias: None
Product: krita
Classification: Applications
Component: Layer Stack (show other bugs)
Version: 4.3.0
Platform: macOS (DMG) macOS
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Krita Bugs
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2020-08-20 12:07 UTC by Manga Tengu
Modified: 2020-08-21 10:21 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:
Sentry Crash Report:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Manga Tengu 2020-08-20 12:07:05 UTC
Making a layer visible or not is not taken into account in the undo history.
You can not open a file, disable a rough layer, or enable a missing layer and save. You need to make a "dummy" operation for a * to appear next to the file name.

Also sometimes when undoing, if layers are not set back in place as they were, you can have a hard time with your history.

What about giving the ability to take layer visibility into account in undos.?
Comment 1 Dmitry Kazakov 2020-08-20 12:09:51 UTC
Perhaps we should recover undo for layer properties, but make it compressible?
Comment 2 Dmitry Kazakov 2020-08-20 12:11:33 UTC
Hi, Manga!

Could you start a discussion for it on krita-artists? I remember that not having undo for layer properties was an explicit painter's wish. Perhaps they changed their opinion on that?
Comment 3 Manga Tengu 2020-08-20 12:14:05 UTC
1
I thought of something but I found it overkill:
having an undo that ignores layer state and having one which doesn't
2
Yes let's do that !
Comment 5 Halla Rempt 2020-08-21 10:19:48 UTC
*** Bug 389876 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Halla Rempt 2020-08-21 10:21:05 UTC
No, we are not going to put visibility changes in the undo stack and we're also not going to make an option for that. What still is a valid issue is that the document should me marked modified, but that has already been reported.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 389876 ***