Please excuse the noob question. Why are there no odd numbered releases? e.g.
2.5? Do they have a special, internal role?

Andy

On 10/8/07, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 21:29 +0930, David Gowers wrote:
>
> > AFAIK no, it was decided fairly informally, like in many OSS things --
> > people talked, it became the accepted idea over time, and nobody much
> > mentioned it outside of the GEGL-developer and GIMP-developer mailing
> > lists where it was discussed.
>
> We keep announcing this for quite a while. As soon as 2.4 is done, we
> will start to port some internals to GEGL. Since we don't want the next
> development cycle to last forever (again), it remains to be seen how
> much effect this will have feature-wise. It might turn out that GIMP 2.6
> becomes a GEGL driven version of GIMP that provides pretty much the same
> feature set as GIMP 2.4 and only uses GEGL internally.
>
> >  Officially I believe Sven has said
> > something to the effect of 'there is no roadmap; people implement
> > things because it's fun or they need it, not because there is a
> > deadline.'
>
> Well, for GIMP 2.6 and beyond we will need a roadmap. But everyone
> should be busy hacking on 2.4 or preparing the release, so let's wait
> until that is done.
>
>
> Sven
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to