On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote:

> How would you handle compilation, btw? There is no binaries provided,
> and the compilation is not unified at all (some work with gimptool,
> others use auto* tools, some do not compile with version x.y, etc). If
> you can convince everyone to use the same methods, it would be
> easier.

Maybe the solution then, rather than developing a system that can do 
everything, is to develop one that does plugins a certain way. 
They would almost certainly have to be compiled already and then when a 
user runs this tool it gives them access to plugins that would work for 
their platform. (I'm assuming information about the user's platform is 
availiable) The latest plugins wouldn't be immediatly availiable for 
all platforms but that gives time for them to be tested and ported. 

So what I'm saying is that it falls to the plugin developers to compile 
the programs and add them to this system. 

I hope that makes sense :) 

> The bottlenecks will be compilation and network, not the logic glue,
> IMO. Also, some plataforms do not include / have easy access to Perl
> or compiler (more things to add to "you need this list of devel
> packages to get this filter running").

Oh I know that perl is not the best choice for this. I just mentioned it 
because its my personal area of expertise. I would have to learn something 
new if I were to try to develop what i'm talking about (not that thats a 
bad thing, it might actually be fun)


Chris the Christianfreak

Space is big.  You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly
big it is.  I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the
drug store, but that's just peanuts to space.
                -- The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to