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 [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
