<pcg( Marc)@goof(A.).(Lehmann )com> writes:

>> I give shit on msoffice but GTK+ is the GIMP ToolKit and we will have
>> a hard time to explain why even it's major release numbers diverge.
> Pardon? Why would you ever have a problem explaining why version
> numbers of *different* packages *differ*?
> You don't even have a problem of explaining why version numbers for single
> files differ, even less so for different packages.
> That GTK+ is the GIMP ToolKit is not at all of any concern, after all,
> gimp is the minority of applications using it. GTK+ has evolved. IF you
> want to tie the version numbers, better make it a single package.

That is a lame argument, really. GIMP and GTK+ used to be a single
package, it was called GIMP. There is still a close relationship
between the two. Both have come far and IMO both deserve a 2 as major
version number. The switch from GTK+-1.2 to 2.0 was a lot smaller than
what we have to offer for GIMP now.

> You obviously haven't read my mail. Really, I don't see why you are
> so pissed off... I don't need to look at the code to see that there
> are no major changes, and certainly none of the changes planned for
> 2.0 for a long time.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. Almost of all the GUI changes that were
planned for 2.0 are there. What is missing is a proper redesign of the
inner core. That is IMO a much smaller change than what we have
achieved sine GIMP-1.2. It will certainly be less visible to the user.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to