On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:29 +0100, David Marrs wrote:

> Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the 
> team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any 
> further.

We haven't really discussed and rejected this particular idea. The point
here is just that the current rule is that the GIMP team only provides
the source code. The creation, distribution and maintainance of binary
packages has been left to other parties. The current website tries to
explain this point and only gives recommendations for binary packages.

In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense
to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary
packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks,
then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the
front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are
effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages
are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide
the binaries.

If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really
provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32
user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app
bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and
to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that.


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to