> It looks like you have a bad opinion
> of the GIMP developers, but I hope that you will change your mind....
Although it doesn't improve my opinion that you lead with a personal attack
misrepresenting my throughts, I do not in general have a "bad opinion" of
GIMP developers. I do find some highhanded in seeking to direct me, who am
not a GIMP developer, in how I spend my time.
> 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).
I wasn't there, and only have the word of the original Film Gimp developers
to go by. I have searched the archives and, except for complaints about it
being difficult to locate or build, have found nothing about the HOLLYWOOD
branch or Film Gimp.
If you can produce any message from the archives to support your contention
I would be interested to see it.
> Recently, I have asked for more cooperation between the two teams so
> that the projects do not diverge too much.
Film Gimp forked at GIMP 1.0.4. When you say "not diverge too much" do you
mean to suggest that GIMP has changed little since 1.0.4?
> I don't think that anybody
> has said that Film Gimp should cease to exist.
Not in those exact words, rather that we should stop wasting our time on it
and get behind GIMP instead.
> "The GIMP group has a reputation for being unfriendly to operating
> systems other than Linux."
> This is also wrong.
GIMP has documented no official position on what operating systems it
I don't want to misrepresent individuals by reporting a subjective
impression of a group, and have rectified that. Regarding your comments
about the Windows version of GIMP in the same paragraph, I am checking
> 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).
Are the FreeBSD, Solaris, IRIX and OS/2 efforts truly internal to GIMP,
treated more like a cousin as with GimpWin, or totally independent efforts
like MacGimp and Film Gimp?
I only find Linux, Solaris, and Windows binaries on ftp.gimp.org. Where on
the GIMP Web site is the documenation for Solaris, FreeBSD, Mac, IRIX, and
> "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/.
No, I couldn't find any. The "about" link was broken when I checked, and is
now gone entirely. In looking again I did find the mailing list for them
Please tell me what information I could find about macgimp.org if I knew
where to look.
> 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:
There is no mention of the HOLLYWOOD branch or Film Gimp in that document.
GEGL is not Film Gimp.
> Robin, I hope that you can correct the inaccuracies in the current
I always do. Thanks for your clarifications.
Gimp-developer mailing list