On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 02:04:51PM +0100, Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that I am not engaging in any kind of Perl-bashing here: Perl is my

Indeed, you aren't. However, you get a lot of things wong:

> - Gimp-Perl is broken and is not maintained

Well, I don't know of anything like "gimp-perl is broken". I think that
build problems that are due to people using the wrong compiler (like on
irix), or problems with gtk-perl (that I am still not aware of) do not
warrant such wording as "gimp-perl is broken".

Also, gimp-perl not being maintained is news to me. Who claims this?? I
was under the impression that I was the maintainer, and I certainly still
maintain it. Where do you have this "gimp-perl is not maintained"? Or has
the maintainer silently changed without the maintainer knowing it?

I really wonder what is going on here, but there is a great deal of
confusion and misinformation going on...

-- 
      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       [EMAIL PROTECTED]      |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |
                                                         |
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to