On Thursday 26 May 2005 01:16 pm, Carol Spears wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 07:50:31PM +0300, Erika De Jesus wrote:
> > Carol Spears wrote:
> > >could you expand on the comparison for me? i do not see any
> > >similarities and i am interested to see what similarities you see
> > >between the two separately licensed, separately funded softwares
> > > that do completely different tasks on my computer.
> > >
> > >help me with this one ....
> > >
> > >carol
> > it's like this carol.
> > firefox is expanded by millions of users worldwide by submitting
> > themes, plugins, and extensions. i think pierre was talking about
> > gimp should be the same. that it should also be expanded by users,
> > since it is also open source.
> > the comparison is:
> > GIMP: open source app
> > is to
> > Firefox: open source app
> > GIMP's plugins
> > is to
> > Firefox's extensions
> > i hope i helped. :)
> no, not really.
> one is clearly gnu and the other is not so clearly mpl. there is a
> bunch of online discussions of the similarities between mpl and lgpl,
> so many discussions that the big question of "if they are the same,
> what is the reason for the existence of two documents".
> one difference that just screams is the fact that gimp can make mng
> but the "open source browser" cannot display them and the nice
> developers that made a plug-in for this were scolded and it is no
> longer available.
> millions of users with an mpl'ed voice, all working together ....
I'll try to clarify Pierre's & Erika's points, if I'm reading them
correctly. You have obviously gone off in a different direction than I
think either of them were heading, but you also make some good points.
Is that being diplomatic enough? ;o)
They are not comparing the programs nor how they are wrote or what
license they are under, but instead offering, I believe, a nice way for
users to add things to their Gimps. The Gimp already includes several
plugins, etc with each build and that's fine, those shouldn't be
discarded. What they are suggesting, and Erika or Pierre correct me if
I'm mistaken, is to make the plugins available like the extensions are
available in Firefox. Have someone make a depositry of plugins
available and fix Gimp so that from the menu, you can add or remove or
update those plugins each user wants in their setup! This would allow
more people to contribute to the plugins and also allow each user to
decide which ones they want.
Now I'm not sure if the Gimp folks check all the plugins out before
making them available or adding them, but it would seem logical to me
for them to have control over that, so no harmful plugins would be
submitted. Have a contributor send the plugins to someplace, let the
developers check them out, then put them up for users to add to their
Gimp setup. This, I think would make it much easier to add plugins as
well as find them.
I think it would be a good idea to implement something of this nature.
I hope I was able to clarify it a bit more and wasn't misreading the
--- KMail v1.8 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.2 ---
Registered Linux User #225206
There's no problem so awful that you can't
add some guilt to it and make it even worse! ...Calvin & Hobbes
Gimp-user mailing list