On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 12:01:05AM -0600, Robert Citek wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2006, at 10:54 PM, Manish Singh wrote:
> >The guy who did Gimpshop decided to do his own thing, and didn't  
> >consult
> >the community at all before doing it. Since he didn't engage the
> >community and those who actually know the code best, he did it in a
> >completely stupid fashion technically. He forked the code.
> So, he forked the code.  You think he's stupid.  And this forum does  
> not want to help Gimpshop users.  Based on those comments I thought I  
> would go back and reread this section on Forkability[1] and this  
> section on Forks[2] in "Producing Open Source Software"[3].  Would  
> you consider Gimpshop a successful fork?

Considering Gimpshop can't even keep their own website online, I'd say
> [2] http://producingoss.com/html-chunk/forks.html

>From the above page:

   Initiating a Fork

   All the advice here assumes that you are forking as a last resort.
   Exhaust all other possibilities before starting a fork.

For Gimpshop, it was all about forking from the get go. There was no
discussion, no proposal in any of the several places to discuss GIMP
development. No other possibilities were attempted.

The Gimpshop guy ignored pretty much everything in that "Producing
Open Source Software" document, which you seem to hold in high enough
regard to reference it here. Is this someone who rejects it so utterly
worthy of supporting?

Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to