>I think we need to ask ourselves why users would want to try the >latest developer releases of Gimp. If they want to have the latest >because of having the latest, I don't think they'll mind getting CVS >HEAD branches and weeding out possible compile problems. Think "plugin authors". These people are going to want to start working on porting their plugins to 2.0 well in advance of 2.0's release but are not likely to want to cope with being GTK debuggers on top of being GIMP debuggers. Kelly _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Malcolm Tredinnick
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Seth Burgess
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Sven Neumann
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Malcolm Tredinnick
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Michael Natterer
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Kelly Martin
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Lourens Veen
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Adam D. Moss
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Michael Natterer
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Sven Neumann
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Kelly Martin
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Lourens Veen
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Kelly Martin
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Kelly Martin
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Simon Budig
- Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port Sven Neumann
