>> Please do something to get in touch with users, I could never honestly ever
>> say theGimp could be a replacement for photoshop ever if this continues.
> Gimp may or may not be a Photoshop replacement. That depends on the user.
> For me, it's a replacement because since I'm using it I'm not using 
> Photoshop. But certain people want to keep using Photoshop. If your plan 
> is using Photoshop for free, then Gimp it's not for you. If you need an 
> image manipulation program, be welcome.
> If you want Photoshop for Linux, which is a valid desire, you should 
> start asking Adobe to port it, not Gimp coders to create a feature by 
> feature clone.
> Anyway, I also think that a better communication between existing coders 
> and users would be nice for certain situations.
> But non-users-wanting-photoshop aren't gimp users. And I understand when 
> a coder pisses off if one of these guys say "Gimp sucks because it 
> hasn't X feature" and threatens not using Gimp if  the coders don't do 
> what he wants.
I understand such things can piss off the people who are devoting their 
own time to the project.  But if I'm understanding you right, you're 
suggesting that users shouldn't hope for gimp to be as feature-filled as 
photoshop.  But why not?  As a believer in open-source, I want gimp to 
be the best it can be and I'm willing to submit feature requests and bug 
reports to help get it that way.  I'd rather spend my time doing that 
than getting a proprietary software package ported to linux by Adobe 
(not gonna happen!)

I think it is important to open source projects that they value their 
users and reach out to potential users.  It's good for a project to have 
many people interested in it, even if those people don't code.  I'm not 
saying that the GIMP doesn't value and reach out.  I just want to 
establish the point that those are actually good things to do in the 
first place.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to