On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 11:48:06AM +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
> Selon Michael Schumacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > > Von: Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > If it was put in bugzilla, the patch would have been
> > > refused, or we would have asked him to work on it.
> >
> > That's how things are handled in Bugzilla, so what is the problem?
> 
> The guy scratched an itch. Why should he go to a lot of effort to have that
> change integrated into GIMP CVS? What's in it for him? He scratched an itch,
> and moved on. Great! I'm happy for him.

Scratched an itch, and caused tons of confusion in a community.
Horrible.

> > > So why worry? I'm happy to see this kind of thing happenning around the
> > > GIMP.
> >
> > We are worried because some people don't make a distinction between Gimpshop
> > and GIMP.
> 
> And? He changed some labels and shortcuts - is it any less the GIMP for that? 
> I
> would say no.

You'd be wrong. Misinformation about the UI doesn't help anybody. It's
not even clear to people that they are using a patched GIMP.

Maybe I should take Fedora, rename it "Debora", but only on the CD
packaging, and rename the rpm command to "dpkg", and make 1/2 the
command line options to it match dpkg, and maybe changing some help text
here and there, and release it as something that eases the transition
from Debian to Fedora. And lag a couple months behind Fedora on all bug
fixes, so Debora users don't upgrade, even for security critical bugs.

Also, push all the support concerns onto Fedora proper, they'd be thrilled
to handle it right? And I'm sure Fedora users would love hearing about
"dpkg" on their lists and not be confused at all.

I'm scratching an itch. It's all good, right?

-Yosh
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Reply via email to