Patrick McFarland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I dont agree with the gimp and film gimp development groups. Film
> Gimp should be eventually folded into Gimp 2.0. Having two branches
> like this sucks bad. Film Gimp is slowly turning into something
> that isnt gimp at all, and I see alot of reinventing of wheels, or
> even parrallel development of the same code, because the development
> teams dont communicate enough.
the point is that the new film-gimp maintainer or any of the people
working on film-gimp don't communicate with us at all. The project
somehow came back to life without any notification on this
mailing-list. We had to hear about it in the news. Among these news
that appeared on the internet is a lot of wrong information. To me it
looks as if the film-gimp people try to actively spread FUD about the
> From what I heard, Gimp originally declined a merge with the
> hollywood branch, which I see as a serious mistake.
this is exactly the wrong information I referred to above. The
film-gimp web-site makes you think that the film-gimp people expressed
an interest to merge and the gimp people refused to take this into
account. This is just plain wrong.
It has always been the goal of the GIMP developers to merge the
features needed for film-editing into the main GIMP. This has been a
major subject on the GIMP developers conference. We were happy to have
Caroline and Calvin at the conference who explained the concepts of
GEGL as well as the needs of the film industry to us and I'm glad to
see that they are still actively developing the GEGL library.
I also liked the idea of the new film-gimp project to make the
HOLLYWOOD branch available to a larger audience. Building a reasonably
functional tarball that everyone can build was a good thing to do. Now
people have something to play with and can start improving the gimp
core and GEGL so that the main gimp can have these features as well.
The direction the film-gimp project is taking at the moment seems like
a wasted effort to me. That is my personal opinion and I have strong
arguments for it but so far none of the film-gimp developers have asked
for it and I will thus keep my arguments for me.
Gimp-developer mailing list