Thus spoke Nick Lamb
> >From the user's perspective The Gimp is part of GNOME. For 1.2 this

Depends on the user.  Some (not me) Linux users may see this cuz it looks
similar.  I doubt AIX or IRIX users would see it that way.  And a lot of
Gimp users are using IRIX - high profile users in Hollywood.

> won't be really true, but only because of lack of development time to
> handle the changes. Is there serious concern here that user's will
> NOT want a GNOME-enabled Gimp in 2001 or 2002 when the 1.3 series
> might reasonably be expected to conclude with a new stable release?

GNOME-enabled is one thing.  GNOME-dependent is another.  Requiring GNOME
libs on non Linux platforms may not be appreciated.  If GNOME dependency is
added, a determination on the difficulty on getting GNOME libs on non-Linux
platforms has to be made.  Since I don't currently use GNOME (I don't
happen to need the added functionality that it currently offers) I don't
know much about how portable it's become.  But GTK and Gimp, at least, run
on lots of platforms.  Maybe that means GNOME is also fairly portable.

> I suppose we might conclude that vendors will ship only KDE, in which
> case maybe those wacky Qt people will show up again and threaten to
> code a replacement Kim*g*sh*p if we won't re-write Gimp in C++ :)

The world doesn't live just on Linux.  Gimp runs on other platforms.
That's a bigger issue, IMHO.  Making it behave nicely under the GNOME or KDE
environments is less difficult.
Michael J. Hammel           | There are always women who will take men on their
The Graphics Muse           | own terms. If I were a man I wouldn't bother to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  | change while there are women like that around.     Ann Oakley, British sociologist, author.

Reply via email to