I am hereforth asking you to apologise, if possible, both in private
and on the list for this message. We are runing a project needing

I cannot sincerely do so, in this instance. I do not apologize for
expressing my amusement, unless I judge that the situation was genuinely
worsened by my behaviour.

It's certainly true that my message can be misinterpreted -- on the net,
it's probably wisest to just assume no hidden meanings -- if it looks like a
fish, assume it is a fish (and nothing more).

much of new developers and contributors, and are in no position of
theating anyone like this. Please perceive I am no  "police"  - I am
asking this personally, but I also have promised the people
organizing the LGM I'd tlak to gimp developers to try to make the
enviroment more frindly to newcomers.

In my observation, friendly sometimes is not  polite -- for instance,
answering as I did rather than giving a detached commentary free of any
emotional context at all.
This is why I view the way I replied as better (and certainly more friendly)
than most previous mails of mine on this list.

(btw, having to  explicitely delete  a python object __is__ a bug -
objects that are seeing in python should be garbage collected when
they are no longer referecenced. )

I avoided commenting on that because it wasn't clear whether they actually
were no longer referenced. I certainly agree that there is something wrong
with the gimp.delete convention here -- it only behaves how I'd expect

I'd definitely like to see more PyGimp developers myself -- hardly anyone
seems to make as extensive use of it as I do. Perhaps a standard module path
for pygimp plugins could be worked out (arguably, the PDB removes this need,
but the PDB is cranky to use compared to Python modules)
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to