On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:34:45 +0200, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 11:39 +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> > Providing a one-click download button is unlikely to cause more
> > problems or confusion.
> In my opinion it would. Users wouldn't know where to get information
> about the installer they just downloaded or where to report problems
> with it.

Why wouldn't they know?  They visit www.gimp.org to get their
software, so it makes sense that they also look around on that same
site if they want to get information or to report problems about
what they just downloaded.

Currently, even if they download the binary package from SourceForge,
they will anyway have to go back to www.gimp.org if they want to get
the information about how to use Bugzilla to report bugs.  And since
we discussed previously the opportunity to move the installer FAQ to
gimp.org (if Jernej agrees), the users would find everything they
need on the web site.

> We should IMO keep a Download button and we should try to figure out the
> user's operating system to make it as simple as possible to get to the
> page where we explain that the GIMP team only provides the source code
> and where we point people to the binary installer. We should also
> encourage Jernej to provide a single installer for GTK+ and GIMP.

Regardless of what we say about it, people do not care if the team
provides only the source code.  As I mentioned previously, the Windows
package built by Jernej is considered as "the" GIMP package by most
users and they probably do not know that the only official package from
the team is the source code.  And IMHO, they shouldn't even have to

Most Linux users know that when a new package is released (GIMP or any
other software), this usually means that a new version of the source
code is out and they either have to build it on their own or to wait
for their favorite distro to update their package.  Windows users and
MacOS X users do not have the same expectations: they expect to be
able to download and install the software immediately.  If the Windows
binary package is not available, then the software is not released

Since Firefox was cited as an example at the beginning of this thread,
I think that we should follow the same example and try to have
installers for Windows and MacOS X (if possible) ready when we
announce a new stable release.  Other packages that are less popular
than GIMP or Firefox follow the same model, so why couldn't we help
our users in the same way?

I know that this is a change compared to our current policy and it
also raises some practical problems if we want to have packages ready
on time (more pressure on Jernej...) but I think that it would be
better for the (Windows) users than sticking to the current policy
"we only release the source code".

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to