On Wednesday 26 July 2006 20:42, Karl Günter Wünsch wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 July 2006 19:52, Michael Schumacher wrote:
> > Karl Günter Wünsch wrote:
> > The whole 2.3 branch is unstable and in development...
> I know, but wasn't the 2.3 branch to be a short lived one, leading quickly
> to a stable 2.4?
The life of the 2.3 branch is as long as the life of the 2.2 branch. That's
far from short.
> And then please have a look at the date I posted the first bugs in my first
> rant, it's three weeks ago. Besides the first one being classified quickly
> as confirmed, nobody really looked at them. In my experience (in our
> company there is a similar bug reporting system) this means that noone
> cares, or anyone who cares overlooked the reports.
Bill and myself are the two developers that spent the most time on these new
tools. We have both been on holidays for the past 3 weeks. Don't come to
conclusions so fast.
Further, your bug reports are very nice, but I'm afraid you're being
counter-productive with your mails. We are not working for you, and the fact
that you purposedly use a development version for your production work will
not make us fix anything faster - quite the contrary, your mail subject lines
tend to drive me away.
> Of course I would rather fix these broken things myself (I am a seasoned
> software developer in both C and C++, earning my living as a developer) but
> there is no starting point in the documentation sources for the tool itself
> - so there is no way for me to get my hands dirty and change anything for
> the better - except for starting over with a similar but functioning tool
> as a starting point and trying to carry over as much functionality as
> possible. regards
> Karl Günter
Maybe you should try to join the developers IRC channel to get started, now
that we are both back. We wouldn't mind a helping hand on these tools.
Gimp-developer mailing list