On Sunday, October 24, 2010 21:49:52 Tomek CEDRO wrote:
>  We waste more time and energy on talking than simply fixing
> this issue.
This is not an issue to be fixed. This is a consious decision made in the 
deveopment of gimp-

> The patch is created for 2.6, I am switching back to 2.4
> then. You can be proud of your bright new vision and forcing everyone
> to use it, because you know better than user.
Nobody is forcing anyone to use it, but for some reason you want to.

> You are right, I can
> still use version 2.4 or patch the sources of 2.6, but like I said -
> its not Open Source anymore, only the source code is available,
> because you are not open to feedback and user ideas, even when patch
> is ready. 
We are very much open to your ideas, but you arent offering an idea, you are 
compaining about a change with myriad of user ideas, reasons, discussions and 
idea processing behind it, and reitating all those arguments just to convince 
you is just not doable. Aslo, I personaly belive GIMP is too big of a codebase 
to just accept anything more than simple bug fixes as hit and run patches. 
Everything else needs a bit more commitment than clobering up a patch without 
much discussion or understanding of the big picture and expecting it to land 
in master for everybody else to maintain. 

> Maybe someone come soon and enforce his own vision
> irreversibly destroying your work, then you will understand what I was
> talking about.

This happens all the time when we discuss gimp development and direction. With 
different perspectives, disagreements are inevtable. I've had ideas crushed and 
patches thrown out or found unsuitable, but something is always learned, some 
perspective cleared and progress made.

And finally just a general thought: To have a conversation you need to be 
willing to listen as well as talk.

-- Alexia
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to