debian sid has given me some broken g* things.  i was playing dselect
games to try to get things to install correctly. 

at one point, i attempted to install the gtk2 stuff i needed by
requesting gimp2.  this is the listing that prompted these questions and
i understand that it could be debian specific answers.

asking dselect gave me a dependency list that was astounding compared to
what i need to build the gimp from the cvs sources.  i configure

all of that libgail and sax stuff is to build the docs?  is that the
only way for the documentation to work for special devises and the other
accessibily issues?

is it gtk decisions or maybe does it go back to gnome decisions?

i was trying to make this web site so that we could document things as
simply as possible.  i "magically" found really good help for this (aka
Helvetix and people to help him translate to me).  my ultimate goal was
to clean up the docs to build with the web site equally simply.

i had a really bad year in so many ways and it is difficult to find
volunteer time when your life crumbles around you and you are fighting
some surgery and <snip -- long sad boring list>.  if everyone had been
working as a team to fight the good war or whatever, someone would have
prevented this from happening.  it was not with the original goals as
was explained to me by all the people who had been working on the gimp.

i was trying to build a life where i could have enough to get by on,
make my own decisions about my environment; have people over to visit
and travel around when something interesting came up.  even have a
little excess income to travel myself on.  my idea was to talk to people
with special computer needs.  whatever, fonts; security; accessibility
either the devise or the internet.  and build it up again slowly.

someone somewhere should be embarrassed that the community distribution
of gimp2 has so many dependencies.  it was not supposed to be like that
and anyone with half a brain who plays with that stuff can figure that

can someone explain to me what went wrong?  accessibility should have
never meant a lot of extra baggage.  i cannot help but think that it all
goes back to that problem with xhtml.  "inline" should be an attribute
only for <img></img>.  "inline" is not a commandment worth making in a
list of markup rules.  

i saw the self-definition in the kernel yesterday.  right there where
the license says that you can distribute it and copy it but not use it.
(i also saw where they are mounting bios like it is a flash card, heh --
those kernel guys are really scary and nuts).  the image tag problem is
not a self definition problem but really does not use the power of xml.

i do not understand the reason that the sgml files get hauled around
everywhere.  i also understand that the old gimp developers had to
"whore" themselves out to crappy software using in order to make gimp
work for them.  one i spoke to had to use micro$oft word (eek) to make
the book i bought (from the company that does the most to publish the
gnu software documentation also, which is one of those weird sad things
i learned).  at least this prostitution of values was for something that
was honestly commercial.  i bring this up now because it seems like new
people have prostituted maybe not the gimp but its supporting software
and not themselves for commercial gain.

i would like for someone to make this take on the situation wrong.  i do
not like what i see when i get gimp2 from debian.  can someone explain
it better so it does not appear as i see it right now?


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to