On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 11:36 -0600, Scott wrote:
> Just curious, what would be so wrong with saving the original file as
> a backup before doing a destructive save? Emacs only bites me when I'm
> *really* stupid....
There's nothing wrong with that. It's even on the list of things that
the file plug-in library should have. The file plug-in library we would
like to port all our file plug-ins to. If you are so much interested in
this, perhaps want to offer your help with this task?
> I am so glad that Guillermo stuck by his guns and apparently *finally*
> got the developers to realise the illogic of this "feature". If more
> of us users would be as persistent instead of just going away after
> the initial knee-jerk "you don't know enough to even be talking to us"
> response which seems too prevalent here, maybe the Gimp would become
> all that it can be.
If more users would be so persistent, as you call it, then there would
probably not a single developer left who would feel that developing GIMP
is fun. There would probably be noone who would be willing to spend
his/her free time on it.
I don't see the point in your mail. We listened to Guillermo and his
issue was addressed in almost no time. It was absolutely not needed to
stick to any guns.
We are working very hard to finally get 2.4 out and because we are
taking this very seriously, we are in this pre-release mode for a long
time already. It would help a lot if we could concentrate on the
important things now which is to bring out GIMP 2.4. The users could
finally benefit from the hard work the developers have put into GIMP
over the last years. Perhaps than the users would finally realise that a
lot is happening to make GIMP better and easier to use.
Can we settle this now and get back to work? Thanks.
Gimp-developer mailing list