On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 01:40:05 -0800, "Robin Rowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> More docs.
I†think that some parts of this article are really inaccurate and are
likely to cause some unnecessary damage to the reputation of both
projects (GIMP and Film Gimp). It looks like you have a bad opinion
of the GIMP developers, but I hope that you will change your mind (and
the page). Here are some parts of your page that are incorrect (IMHO):
"Many GIMP people have expressed the opinion that Film Gimp should
cease to exist, that Film Gimp developers should instead all work
on GEGL or GIMP."
This is wrong. The plan was that Film Gimp and GIMP would merge
around version 2.0 (you can check the gimp-dev mailing list archives
from 2000 for some statements about that). This did not mean that any
project would cease to exist, but rather that one tool (or at least a
common codebase) would support the features that are necessary for
Recently, I have asked for more cooperation between the two teams so
that the projects do not diverge too much. I don't think that anybody
has said that Film Gimp should cease to exist. I wrote that it would
be nice if Film Gimp would try to converge rather than diverge so that
both projects could benefit from the same features, but this is very
different from what you wrote above.
"The GIMP group has a reputation for being unfriendly to operating
systems other than Linux."
This is also wrong. Recently, a single user who had never made any
significant contribution to the GIMP has been posting some flames to
the gimp-developer mailing list and claiming that the GIMP should be a
Linux thing only. Many developers have quickly replied to him, saying
that he was wrong. So the developers are really open to all operating
systems (otherwise, there would be no version for Windows, MacOS,
FreeBSD, Solaris, IRIX and even the venerable OS/2). For example, I
currently do most of my GIMP testing and development on Solaris and I
try to support Windows users whenever I can (e.g., through Bugzilla).
"For some time the GIMP site didn't mention the GimpWin project, but
they reached an accommodation where GimpWin is mentioned in the
GIMP downloads section and its files are hosted in a separate area
of the GIMP site."
The GIMP for Windows page from Tor Lillqvist has been mirrored on
www.gimp.org since February 1999 (or maybe a bit earlier, but that's
the earliest reliable timestamp that I found). At that time, the
Windows version was still very unstable. Also at that time, the
maintainers of the GIMP web site had stepped down, so the updates were
very slow except for the news items taken from Xach's site. Despite
the fact that www.gimp.org was almost unmaintained, a direct link to
the GIMP for Windows page (http://www.gimp.org/win32/) has been
featured on the front page of www.gimp.org since November 2000,
according to the WayBack Machine:
In September 2001, I volunteered for maintaining the old web site
while a new design was being worked on. At that time, I added an
additional link to the Windows version on the download page, but it
had always been mentioned on the front page.
"GimpWin changes are incorporated into GIMP, but GIMP and GimpWin
maintain totally separate mailing lists."
There is no GimpWin (WinGimp is probably OK, though). GIMP for
Windows and GIMP are the same program, using the same CVS repository
for development and also using the same Bugzilla for bug tracking.
Tor and other developers of the Windows version participate in the
development of the GIMP in the same way as other GIMP developers.
There are of course some issues that are specific to Windows
(installer, different OS, etc.) so it is normal to discuss these on a
separate mailing list. There were also some differences that were due
to the fact that the Windows version had to use a hacked version of
GTK+-1.3 instead of 1.2 (used by the other OS's), but most of these
differences have been resolved with the move to GTK+-2.0. Anyway, the
discussion about new features or major code changes that are not
OS-specific are usually shared among all developers. So it is
incorrect to present the Windows version as being totally separate
from the other supported platforms.
"Not much is known about the MacGimp group. They don't seem to have
a public mailing list."
It is true that the Mac version is not advertised as much as the other
versions (although it is linked from the GUG page), but you can find a
lot of information about it on http://www.macgimp.org/.
"The GEGL project is working toward a future version of GIMP, that
is, GIMP 2. Some GIMP developers also work on GEGL. GEGL is viewed
as part of the GIMP project, even though the code is different."
Yes, the code is different, but this is the goal of GEGL and GIMP 2.
The goal is to re-write the low-level pixel operations because the
current GIMP code supports only three types of drawables: grayscale,
indexed (8 bits only) and RGB with 8 bits per channel. So Calvin
Williamson and Caroline Dahllof started to work on GEGL in order to
support 16 bits per channel and floating-point channels. This will be
used as the core code for pixel operations in GIMP 2.0. That has been
planned since the beginning, and it was summarized in December 2000
when Sven and Mitch posted their "future plans" to the gimp-developer
mailing list. A copy of that message can be found here:
Robin, I hope that you can correct the inaccuracies in the current
page. This would be in the best interest of both projects.
Gimp-developer mailing list