On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 20:13 -0400,
saulgo...@flashingtwelve.brickfilms.com wrote:
> Quoting "Joao S. O. Bueno" <gwid...@mpc.com.br>:
> > Oliver -
> >
> > this rant has no reason to be.  Sorry for that.
> I disagree. Oliver has politely raised an issue to be discussed and  
> presents some valid points.
> GIMP is nearly a million lines of code -- well over a million if you  
> take into account GEGL and BABL. If a potential code contributor  
> examine 1000 lines of code each and every day, it would take nearly  
> three years before his perusal would be complete.

That's why we have the devel-docs folder in the GIMP source tree where
we try to explain the structure of the source code and document the
internal and external APIs as well as file formats. Sure, there should
be more documentation like this. Everyone is invited to contribute.

> Libgimp also is not what I would expect an application's library to  
> be. Instead of being a library of functions which GIMP invokes but are  
> factored out so other programs can make use them separate from GIMP,  
> the opposite seems to be the case: libgimp invokes functions internal  
> to GIMP (other programs can thus use libgimp, but only if GIMP is  
> running).

Taking your example, the role of libgimp is explained in
devel-docs/structure.xml. Sure, this documentation could be extended to
make things even more clear. Everyone is invited to contribute.


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to