From: Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:15:25 +0200

   Robert L Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

   > IMHO, this is not a good reason for numbering it 2.0.  By now, GTK+
   > stands independently of the GIMP; it's maintained by different people,
   > the releases aren't synchronized, and indeed (even in 1.2) the GIMP
   > has its own widget set layered on top of GTK+.

   Huh? Well, of course we have build widgets on top of the toolkit we
   use. What are you trying to prove here? I fail to see your point.

   > Whatever the origins of the name, at present GTK+ is no more "the
   > GIMP toolkit" than Gimp-Print is "the Print plug-in for the GIMP".

   I don't agree. I do think that GIMP and GTK+ are in fact still more
   tightly coupled than you receive it. GIMP developers are constantly
   contributing to GTK+ and they do take part in decisions made for
   GTK+. At the same time GTK+ developers are giving the GIMP developers
   a hand when it comes to improving and debugging The GIMP. The two
   projects are not as diverged as perhaps gimp-print and gimp.

The point of both of these comments is that these two projects are not
joined at the hip.  They have independent release cycles, and GTK+
itself is considerably more than just a service library for the GIMP
(which is why it's necessary to layer other widgets on top of it).
Furthermore, from a user standpoint functionality such as CMYK and 16
bits is a lot more interesting than the fact that it's layered on top
of GTK+ (very few end users really care if it's based on GTK+, Qt,
Xaw, Motif, or whatnot).  There may certainly be significant
contributions from the GIMP back to GTK+, but that doesn't mean that
the entire architecture of the GIMP is inextricably linked to that of
GTK+ in the way that, say, KDE is intertwined with Qt (where the
version numbers now do match from release to release).

Unless we're talking about a complete rearchitecting of the system
(and switching from one version to another of a UI framework doesn't
qualify in my book), IMHO internal changes aren't usually a reason to
bump the major version number.  There should be some really compelling
change in the user capabilities in addition to major internal changes.

Robert Krawitz                                     <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>      

Tall Clubs International  -- or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project lead for Gimp Print   --

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to