On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 05:02:19 -0700, David Southwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That would mean more developers, features and a bigger                        
>  
> and better community of users. IMHO gimpshop is a great idea. According to 
> some its developers have not behaved well -- my guess is there are two sides 
> to the story. The important thing is to look to what can be provided not what 
> can be stopped!!

Unfortunately, more users does not automatically mean more developers
and more features.  In some cases, this is even the opposite: some
projects have seen their number of developers decrease as the number of
users increased, because the community became worse (large number of
conflicting user requests, unrealistic expectations, developer burn-out,
etc.).

You claim that there are "two sides to the story" regarding the
development of Gimpshop.  This may be the case, but I encourage you to
take a look at the archive of the gimp-developer mailing list and find
the early discussions about Gimpshop.  Then see the suggestions about
how to do it "right" and what happened since then (hint: Gimpshop is
still a fork using modifications to the source code instead of being
an add-on).

As I wrote in my previous message, the GIMP developers are not opposed
to some of the ideas included in Gimpshop, if only they were
implemented in a correct way.  The developers are open to suggestions
and are looking at alternative solutions whenever possible.  Just
check the recent usability enhancements in SVN if you are not
convinced about that.

> Currently all I am suggesting is that people with a history of scores to 
> settle need to keep quiet and if others want to talk about gimpshop then let 
> them do so. Noone is saying any single individual should feel obliged to 
> contribute to those discussion.

I don't think that I have a history of scores to settle with Gimpshop.
If fact, I do not even remember contributing to previous discussions
(I haven't checked, though).  But please be a bit more open yourself
and consider what others have written in the last days.  Discussions
about Gimpshop tend to create confusion on this list.  Even if we
ignore the technical and political aspects of how Gimpshop was
implemented, the simple fact that any discussion about Gimpshop on
this list tends to generate noise should be a sufficient reason to
avoid such discussions in the future.  This doesn't mean that Gimpshop
is a taboo that should not be mentioned here.  But instead of
discussing it here, it would be much better to point users to a more
specific mailing list.

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

Reply via email to