On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 01:01:12AM -0600, Robert Citek wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2006, at 12:20 AM, Manish Singh wrote:
> >On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 12:01:05AM -0600, Robert Citek wrote:
> >>Would you consider Gimpshop a successful fork?
> >Considering Gimpshop can't even keep their own website online, I'd
> >say no.
> Then why the fuss?
The fuss is about the complete half assed nature of it. A successful
fork would be better, since a successful fork would maintain its own
support resources, like separate mailing lists, a separate bug tracker,
separate irc channels... all the stuff mentioned on that
Forks aren't necessarily bad. All the major Linux distro vendors
effectively fork the Linux kernel. But they maintain proper support
channels to maintain the fork, and thus polluting the mainline kernel
resources isn't much of a problem.
Gimpshop slaps the people who know the code of gimp in the face, and
then expects gimp.org to take up the slack because they don't know how
to properly support a community. I don't see why the animosity is so
BTW, Robert, you have a bad habit of not answering questions posed to
you here. I'm going to do the same thing to you, to illustrate how it
Gimp-user mailing list