You and Sven make some very goods points, however dismissing the
suggestions of professional users out of hand is a fairly bad idea,
imho. Saying "we cannot accept any new ideas until the existing ones
are done" is ok, but just dismissing them out of hand might deny you
future access to their expertise (which can be fairly valuable).
Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> - We have far more ideas than developers. We even have far more *good*
> ideas than developers.
One way to reduce idea overload is to have some professional artists who
really know how things work and can give really good feedback. This way
you're not having a flood from all users. Though in gimp's place it
sounds like such people would be more useful for evaluating planned
features/improvements then actually coming up with new ones.
> - The development cycle leading to GIMP 2.4 was much too long. It took
> almost 3 years since the release of GIMP 2.2. The development of
> GIMP 2.6 should be much shorter so that everybody can benefit from
> new features and other improvements without having to wait several
> years between stable releases. But this means that we have to make
> some hard choices and leave some interesting stuff for later.
> - The integration of GEGL and the support for higher bit depths is not
> a trivial task. Although there were great hopes that GIMP 2.6 would
> have good support for 16 bits per color channel, fancy color spaces
> and other features that many users are waiting for, we will not be
> able to get all of that ready in time. We will make some steps in
> the right direction, but there will still be a lot of work left for
> after 2.6.
> So what does that mean? We already know at this point that it will be
> challenging to achieve all goals that are mentioned in the draft
> roadmap for 2.6. Some of these tasks may seem to be rather obscure and
> may not bring many visible changes in GIMP 2.6, but they are necessary
> so that the releases that will follow 2.6 can support higher bit depths
> (in the core and in the plug-ins) and many other long-awaited features,
> including some improvements in the user interface.
> Considering that we are already struggling with the current list of
> tasks for which some volunteers exist (there are developers willing to
> spend some of their spare time working on them), I think that Sven is
> right when he reminds you that it is not the right time to discuss
> things that are not in the scope of 2.6 (tasks that are not already
> supported by a volunteer developer).
> Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer mailing list