It's a pragmatic response. The development team size (I'm not among them) is such that they need to do their own thing. They've done a lot of work to reach this decision and think that as their vision is realized it will become recognized as clearly the correct move.
As I see it, you've all got three options: live with it, branch GIMP and do things your own way, or develop an alternative to GIMP. Last year I spent a few weeks (really! 120+ hours) studying the code, and to say the least, there's a ton of it and it's all complicated. Good luck with your choices. Pete On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Egor Voznessenski <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi! > > Now, that's exactly a Communist way. > > > Птн 16 Ноя 2012 20:28:45 от Michael Natterer <[email protected]>: > > You can all stop wasting your time arguing. > > > > We did this change for a reason, and we will not revert > > it nor will we make the behavior configurable. > > > > I have not read any of the mails on this thread, > > and I will not reply to any response to this mail. > > > > --mitch > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > gimp-developer-list mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > > > > -- EV -- > _______________________________________________ > gimp-developer-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list >
_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
