On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 06:25:54PM +0100, Alan Horkan wrote:
> Following the Gnome Human Interface Guidelines is something by itself
> which many people consider enough for any application to consider itself a
> Gnome application.
in my opinion, this is the best point you have made here.
> Some people think applications which use Gnome CVS, and Gnome Bugzilla,
> the Gnome Translation Project and maybe evne the Gnome Help browser to be
> a part of Gnome. If a developer has asked for their journal to be
> included on Planet Gnome one might be forgiven for getting they impression
> they considered themselves part of the wider Gnome community.
it is a trade off. when i was using gimp and trying to figure out how
all of this software works, i really tried to install gnome. my brother
did not mind having gimp on his computer (he also did not have much
space for it there) since it more than replaced xv. however, he did not
want gnome installed there since it did nothing that twm or fvwm wasn't
when i got my own computer which was about double my brothers computer
(he had 33M and i had 70M hard drive and similar doubling of not much
ram and other interesting numbers like this) i was quite unimpressed
with the mountains of software that gnome required.
the question has always been for me, who benefits more from the
relationship? gimp has been authored fairly carefully to only need
libraries that it actually needs. gnome was not written this way. gimp
gets cvs and bugzilla from gnome, gnome gets the benefit of gimp's
popularity and the multitude of users testing the toolkit. i dont think
any other application uses the gimp tool kit more than gimp does.
simply due to the fact that gimp actually does more.
> If the GIMP developers decided tomorrow to start saying the GIMP was a
> Gnome application without chaning anything else I sincerely doubt any
> Gnome supports would disagree and in fact I think many would welcome the
off and on, i try to install gedit to see if i can change from NEdit to
something that shares the gimp tool kit with gimp. i have not tried
recently, however the last time i did i had to install so many extra
packages. it is a simple text editor, forchrissakes.
given this example, and the things that i like about gimp (not requiring
extra software until it needs it) i cannot say that the same would be
true if reversed. if GNOME started to call itself a GIMP application
tomorrow, i sincerely doubt that GIMP developers would welcome the
gesture. clean up gedit and i would consider to welcome the idea ....
> Making a firm commitment to supporting the needs of KDE users and make
> promises not to require Gnome libraries certainly does not mean the GIMP
> needs to publically distance itself from Gnome. I firmly support efforts
> for better interoperability and work to keep the GIMP clean and portable.
working with freedesktop.org did this for both GNOME and KDE.
i would like to know the reason that KDE breaks so often at the
freedesktop level? i am so confused by this quality KDE has and open to
any logical explanation.
Gimp-developer mailing list