On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine <
alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Sven Neumann wrote:
>
> >> Of course! But since I'm writing a book about GIMP, I'm trying to get
> >> as close as possible to what will be finally published. When speaking
> >> about documentation, I was thinking to the NEWS file.
> >
> > If you are writing a book, then you should write it about GIMP 2.6.
> > Everything that is in GIMP 2.7 now may still change at this point, in
> > particular any new features.
>
> Or plan an appendix to cover possible changes in 2.8, time/deadline
> permitting
>
> Alexandre
>
> Since the book is not anticipated to be published before the Autumn of
2010, on the contrary I would very much like that it covers at least version
2.8, or still better, version 3.0. This means I'm not writing or completing
chapters that deal with matters changing a lot presently: one-window or
multi-window interface, brush dynamics, layer groups, color depth, color
management, and so on. Am I forgetting important points subject to changes
until version 3.0?

Since I intend to write a very thorough book (about 800 pages in English,
about 550 in French because the publisher cannot afford more), I have a lot
of work in other areas, and I can wait until things are stabilized. But I
want to follow the progress as much as possible. The American publisher is
No Starch, and the French one is Pearson.

Do you think this approach is sensible?
-- 
Olivier Lecarme
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to