On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Stephen J Baker wrote:

> No - I think some people may percieve it as "finished" - although I

Even if the GIMP had every feature of the current versions of Adobe
PhotoShop, Corel Painter, and Jasc Paint Shop combined it still wouldn't
be finished.  There is always something more, more features more file
formats, more platforms.

> personally know that's not true, many people are quite happy with GIMP
> as it is today.

The GIMP is quite simply the best Free Software, Open Source Raster
Graphics tool out there but I want MORE!  I hope the GIMP will
(eventually) become the best Raster Graphics tool bar none.

> As a committed OpenSource developer who might have been interested in
> working on GIMP, I have to say that the level of acrimony and hostility
> that I see between developers is VERY off-putting. (I've been lurking here
> for quite some time).

> I don't know whether you all believe that - or how you do anything
> about it if you do believe it.  But for me, it's the number one reason
> not to get into mainstream GIMP development.

I feel that way too, unfortunately it is so hard not to react in the same
way and get off the downward spiral.  I only very grudginly subscribed to
the developer list at all.

I feel that the active lead developer(s) need to admit this is not a
democracy and be the bad guy, be the benevolent dictator, be the leader
and take decisions that move the GIMP forward.

> I'm only one data point though - others may have quite different
> reasons to stay away.

I am sure there are other factors too but I tend to believe that the
hostility is a deciding factor that turns off new developers.

> One thing that would revive GIMP's fortunes immensely would be to
> merge GIMP and FilmGIMP back into one package.  I know that's a

Not as impractical as trying to merge Gnome and KDE but they have
freedesktop.org and are increasingly working together on shared standards
so GIMP and CinePaint should be able to work together too.

If you look at the history of FilmGIMP it was on an older Hollywood branch
of the GIMP and remerging the branches would have been very difficult even
then and the GIMP developers seem to favour waiting for GEGL to provide
the 32-bit image support.

The port of the GIMP to Gnome2 and various restructuring of FilmGIMP now
CinePaint (they are gradually creeping towards using more C++ for example)
have made the two increasingly incompatible.

> difficult task - and a highly contentious issue too - but if there

I dont even understand why it is contentious anymore.

The split has happened and people need to accept it and move on.  Blame,
accusations or resentment help no one.  One the emotional issues are out
of the way it just becomes an issue of how willing people are to what
needs to be done.

> are only 'N' GIMP developers in the world, you'd really hope that
> N/2 of them were not off working on FilmGIMP.

Keeping a shared standardised Plugin API might be a realistic achievable
goal and help minimize duplication of effort but again the question is if
there are people willing and able to do the work.

There are file format incompatibilities in XCF which Sven recently
'brought up' on the CinePaint list, without 32-bit colour depth there is
only a limited amount that GIMP can do but if there are people willing and
able to do the work...

The next generation file format will have to consider interoperability
with third party applications and make some compromises for the greater
good (use existing standards wherever possible would clearly be a good
star) and hopefully CinePaint will be considered and kept in mind as part
of this process.


Alan Horkan

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to