Several comments to a few of many comments: - to me. the main problem with the user interface is that it is part of a large monolithic back-end-plus-user-interface. If I wanted to make changes to Cin2, where would I start? What I would want (if I were doing any coding) is to be able to draw a circle around the bits of code that I needed to think about. - the other problem with the user interface is that it uses its own toolkit. You don't want to maintain a GUI toolkit. You want to use one that someone else is maintaining. Actually there are several good toolkits out there (Gnome, Qt, wxWidgets, MS Windows) and it would be nice if (at least in principle) anyone could rewrite just the user interface to work with their favourite toolkit without too much effort. Myself, I would go with wx as it is cross-platform. We may need to build some custom widgets, but then separating out that part of the code into a GUI widget would be a win. - free/open source is not open development. You can write code yourself and release it under the GPL, and it is free/open source. But the, what is 'open' development? You need to have a 'Linus' who decides in the end what is and is not part of the official release. What I believe is important is that the design is modular (see my previous posts) so that developers can work on their own modules without official approval and then the community can mix-and-match whichever modules they want. - I agrree with Christian, the name should not be anything like 'Cinelerra'. Cin3 will do as a temporary reference. I'm a bit short of ideas for the release title.
-- Regards, Martin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IT: http://methodsupport.com Personal: http://thereisnoend.org
