"William Skaggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Sven wrote:
>> Let's see. We have GIMP 2.2 done and are preparing to switch to GEGL.
>> At this point you are trying to propose a kludge? Sorry, but I am not
>> going to read any further...
> Well, the most recent ChangeLog entry for gegl is dated 3-25-04, and
> if it is nearly ready to use, then the CVS archive and the gegl web
> page are very misleading.  Am I missing something?

The point you are missing is that we can't expect GEGL to mature into
anything useable if we continue to not using it. The only way to make
things happen is to do them. I am certainly not going to accept any
such kludges in GIMP since we should finally get around to do the
right thing (TM). We've been waiting for this too long already.

That said, perhaps it's about time that we try to come up with a
roadmap for the time after the 2.2 release...

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to