On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Laramie Leavitt wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Kelly Martin wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 02:48:33PM -0700, Laramie Leavitt wrote:
>>> Is anyone actively working on GIMP 2?
>> Insofar as there is activity on GIMP 1.4, yes.
> Is anyone working on it insofar as it relates to GEGL and all that?
> If I understand this correctly, Gimp 2 will use an entirely different
> internal engine.  The plug-ins will likely not work, and numerous
> other changes will render Gimp 2 as an entirely new entity with
> little in common with Gimp, really...

But it would not make much sense to start working on 2.0
before 1.3 is a bit more stable.  Even if there will be
some significant changes in the architecture (e.g., GEGL)
and many parts of the code will have to be rewritten,
this does not mean that everything will start again from
scratch.  It would be better to wait until a reasonably
stable version of 1.3 exists before starting the work on
1.9 or 2.0; otherwise someone would have to spend a lot
of time merging all the changes to the user interface
and all new features that are still being added to 1.3.
Currently, 1.3 is still a moving target (one that moves
faster than you think, thanks to Mitch and Sven).

For more information, you can also have a look at
http://developer.gimp.org/ and look at last year's
proposal about the future of the Gimp.


> So, why not work on Gimp 1.3 and Gimp 2 in parallel?

Besides what I wrote above, another reason is that all
developers who could start working on version 2 are
currently spending a lot of time on 1.3.  If you know
someone who is not busy working on 1.3 and who has the
skills and the time to start working on 2.x (maybe you?),
then please go ahead and propose a new branch in CVS so
that the work can start.  Good luck!  ;-)


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to