Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Another reason may be that it is difficult to build the development
> version because it depends on released versions of some libraries that
> are not included yet in the major GNU/Linux distributions (e.g., GTK+
> version 2.2.2).

both debian unstable, mandrake and redhat provides gtk+2.x for quite a
long time.

there's no problem in providing both gtk+-1.2.x and gtk+-2.x in a

> Also, the number of dependencies for GIMP 1.3.x is much higher than
> the number of dependencies for GIMP 1.2.x, so it is more difficult
> to have a working build environment for the 1.3.x version.

this is a valid point for:
- users of very old distributions
- non developer users (that is most end users)
- windows users (for which getting both a working development suit and
  enough knowledge to build something with required dependancies is
  probably not easy)

> Do we need binary distributions?
> --------------------------------
> There was a discussion about binary distributions.  This may help
> people to try some versions of the GIMP (especially the development
> versions) without having to compile everything.  However,
> maintaining binaries is a lot of work, even if we only maintain
> binaries supplied by others.  In addition, this would bring some
> additional responsabilities that we do not want to have.  For these
> reasons, it was decided that www.gimp.org would not host any
> binaries but would link to the pages of those who are providing
> binaries for various platforms.

yes development and packaging (well binary tarball is some kind of
packaging) are two different tasks.

you can either:
- leave it to distributions (after all gimp-1.3 is already provided in
  mandrake contribs and in debian unstable)
- leave it to a nightly build system (see mozilla)
- leave it to another specialized team (aka you need one people that
  sometimes build windows binaries and someone who sometimes build
  static gimp for linux)
> Is Bugzilla too hard to use for new users?
> ------------------------------------------
> It was suggested to make it easier for users to submit bug reports,
> for example by having an e-mail address to which bug reports can be
> sent without having to register to Bugzilla (we already have such an
> address, although it is not widely known).  This proposal was rejected
> because most of the bug reports (especially from new users) are
> incomplete and require additional information.  If the user does not
> have a Bugzilla account, it is not possible to rely on the automatic
> notification system to send messages to the user when a comment is
> added to their bug report or when the status of their bug report
> changes.

even if bug reporting by mail may not look suitable, being able to
anwser bugzilla by mail is a must.
it saves quite a lot of time and is often see as more easy to use by
developers (at least here at mdk).

there're several extensions that do this (see freshmeat.net or
soft/bugs module in mandrake cvs).

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to