Fabian Frédérick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> > The basic problem is that if every plug-in was included in the
> > distribution, it would be huge.  No solution has yet been found for
> > dealing with this problem.
> Who cares about the size.Everybody wants a lot of plugins !

I don't think so. Most users are completely lost with the number of
plug-ins we feature now. A lot of them are never used and only clutter
the menus.

> Gimp without Gallery Maker for instance is completely unuseful for a large
> scale of users ! Btw 1.3 is dvpt tree so what's the problem ?!

the problem is that it is already a pain in the ass to maintain the hundreds
of plug-ins we include now. Having them in the development tree even means
that they need to get ported to gtk+-1.3 and adapted to any changes in the 
libgimp API we might decide to do. This makes sense for a bunch of core 
plug-ins but not for all of them. Remember, there are only like a handful 
of free-time developers working on this tree.

Actually we'd like to remove a lot of plug-ins from the distribution. They
should end up in a bunch of packages that users can install on top of the
GIMP core packet. If you want to volunteer to maintain a plug-in package,
that would be great!

> > Also some changes may be required to get plug-ins to really play nice
> > with 1.3.  But I'm no hacker so I don't really understand all that stuff
> > and am mostly just guessing.
> AFAIK Perl library didn't changed for ages, so plug-ins released with 1.2X 
> should fit perfectly...Maybe Marc could help on that thread.

are you talking about plug-ins or scripts here?? Plug-ins released with
1.2.x will most likely not work unchanged with 1.3 unless they use no UI 
code at all. There aren't many changes needed, but most won't work out of
the box.

Perl scripts should theoretically work at the moment, but first gimp-perl
needs to be ported to gimp-1.3. At the moment it is disabled from the build
and not included in the distribution since 'make dist' still fails. I have
no clue if there are other problems. Probably gimp-perl should also better
be maintained outside the core gimp packet ?

Then there will certainly be some changes to PDB calls in the future
since we'd like to get rid of all those ugly wrappers in libgimp. We'd also
like to clean up enums used in libgimp. This will affect lots of Perl 
scripts since perl hackers seem to prefer to use numbers where they should
use symbols (2 instead of GIMP_REPLACE). Those scripts will break awfully.

Salut, Sven
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to