On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 12:39:23AM -0600, Kevin Myers wrote:
> Hi Carol,
> I/we are already users and contributors to the ImageMagick and
> GraphicsMagick projects as well as the GIMP. Both of those programs and the
> GIMP have certain key strengths and weaknesses with respect to each other,
> such that they are certainly not direct substitutes in *many* respects.
> That was certainly the case with our previous need regarding command line
> execution of a Gimp script under Windows. For another example, the GIMP can
> handle the size of our larger image files under Windows, while IM and GM
> still cannot. (IM and GM pixel representation in memory is always at least
> 40 bit (8x5), while the GIMP allows 8 bit memory representation, allowing
> roughly 5 times more pixels to be manipulated under Windows).
> It is utterly ridiculous that simply because I voiced concerns about and
> would like for the ability to have gimp scripts execute properly from the
> command line under Windows that you accuse me of "making the GIMP suck".
> The suggestions that I offered earlier this evening were only thrown out for
> consideration, and I didn't try to force those down anyone's throat. All
> that I asked was that GIMP developers try to give adequate consideration to
> the needs of Windows based gimp users rather than selecting an
> implementation that I was worried might have an adverse impact.
> Some bias towards Linux and other Unix based systems is completely
> understandable and acceptable to everyone. We all appreciate the
> deficiencies of Windows and its poor record of adhering to standards (though
> there are *many* similar examples in the *nix world as well). We also
> appreciate that the Linux community is making the biggest share of
> contributions to the GIMP development effort.
> What I don't appreciate, is your apparent lack of sympathy towards users who
> have *no* choice but to run under Windows (for any of numerous reasons) and
> who simply desire to use the gimp (just as you claim to), and to help
> enhance it to meet *their* needs, just as you enhance it to meet your own
> needs under Linux. The gimp is an open source product, and is also
> supported and developed by Windows users, not just *nix heads. So what
> gives you the right to presume that only *nix developers can own and control
> the GIMP (as your comments seem to imply), and to ignore the needs of
> Windows based users and the feedback and proposals of Windows based
> Your statements seem to imply that any user or organization who doesn't like
> the lack of certain GIMP features under Windows can just switch right over
> to Linux at a moments notice, and that simply is NOT the case in many
> situations. For example, in our own situation, we use several extremely
> complex, industry specific technical applications that simply do not exist
> for Linux. Other programs that we use do have Linux counterparts, but would
> require numerous man years of retraining, redevelopment of supporting
> applications, and data conversion in order to switch over, and many are
> *very* expensive applications that are *not* public domain, even under
> Linux, which we cannot afford to replace. Also, we can't afford a bunch of
> duplicate hardware to run both operating systems in parallel, nor can our
> work flows stand the wasted time of constantly rebooting to switch between
> applications running under the different operating systems. From an
> ideological standpoint, we would *love* to switch to Linux, immediately!!!
> >From a practicality and expense standpoint, we just can't do it, and there
> are many other folks in exactly the same boat. To presume otherwise is to
> assume that you know everyone else's business better than they do, and I
> guarantee that you do NOT.
> Our view seems to be quite different from yours. We believe that Windows
> based GIMP users should be able to make contributions (which BTW include
> comments and suggestions) that allow the gimp to work as effectively for us
> under Windows as it does for other folks under Linux, and *of course* at the
> same time not to do anything that would adversely impact Linux users.
> Apparently there are lots of other gimp users and contributors who feel the
> same way as we do. What doesn't seem right is that *some* Linux based
> developers don't seem to have any problem implementing features in such a
> way that it precludes effective use under Windows when it doesn't need to,
> or reject proposed development efforts by others that would benefit Windows
> users simply because there is no perceived benefit to the *nix community.
> I'm not saying at all that has happened in this specific instance regarding
> the issues that I raised earlier this evening and the subsequent discussion.
> What I am saying Carol, is that some of you appear to be having a rather
> knee jerk reaction against someone else who is merely trying to help the
> GIMP better support the operating system that they are using, no different
> than anyone else who might happen to be using some other OS. If the
> approach that I suggested won't work or will cause real problems under
> another OS, that's fine. But what isn't fine is to say in essence "we don't
> care about Windows users and contributors, and we're not going to listen to
> their input", which is basically what I got out of your reply.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carol Spears" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Kevin Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "GIMPDev"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 11:17 PM
> Subject: Re: PDB named and default parameters (was Re: [Gimp-developer] The
> Mark Shuttleworth offer)
> > On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 09:26:23PM -0600, Kevin Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > Admittedly, the Windows command prompt (not simply Explorer) is less
> > > than most *nix command shells. However, there are also a very large
> > > of Windows based GIMP users, and one of the requirements of GIMP 2.x is
> > > it should be as usable under Windows as it is on other operating
> > > I'm not familiar with R5RS, and you could certainly be right in your
> > > regarding that. However, as a Windows GIMP user (and much more rarely a
> > > GIMP bug, patch, fix, and enhancement contributor), I want to make sure
> > > there isn't excessive *nix bias that inhibits or ignores usability needs
> > > under Windows.
> > >
> > TheGIMP only exists for Windows(TM) because at the time, linux and
> > scanners were not working so well together. The GNU/Linux bias is a
> > fact. It is the only reason it exists.
> > > For example, in one past case, I wanted to run a simple GIMP script from
> > > Windows command shell, and there wasn't one single person (Sven and
> > > else included), who was able to tell me how to arrange the quoting to
> > > the script to run along with the required parameters. That level of
> > > disfunctionality is not acceptable, and should be eliminated, even if it
> > > means doing something like "abandoning" (or modifying) certain *nix
> > > standards for the Windows version of the GIMP.
> > >
> > To avoid problems like this, linux developers are fairly good at
> > following standards and all sorts of acronyms like api's and rtfm's --
> > there are more, i cannot remember them.
> > Writing web pages for internet explorer is very limiting and not fun as
> > they have not adhered to browser standards. Are you making TheGIMP suck
> > like this?
> > > Obviously though, I do realize the strong need to minimize any such
> > > Windows-specific behavior, and that any such differences should receive
> > > great deal of very careful consideration before implementation. In the
> > > however, I feel that the scale may have been tipped slightly too far
> > > Windows on such issues.
> > >
> > GNU/Linux is supporting scanners really well now. Perhaps you might be
> > more interested in helping the Image Magick project as they have been
> > running better from the command linue than from the GUI for years. It
> > is available on Windows(TM) also.
> > carol
did you read this whole thing?
Gimp-developer mailing list