On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 05:07 -0700, gimp_user wrote:

> It only received scorn because the GIMP development team ignored the basic 
> requirement of development - using MVC in the early days - so the  code 
> structure does facilitate view customization (or skin development).  IMHO 
> Gimp has never recovered from that internal structural system design flaw.

So you have obviously not even taken the time to look at the code before
you started to write your mostly pointless accusations. Someone told you
that MVC design is the solution for everything and now you are spreading
the word? Do you even know what you are talking about? I don't think so.

> > So... all of this is possible. I think if a PS "face" were done
> > for real, it could only survive as a kind of strap-on rather
> > than a replacement for GIMP.
> If there was an MVC architecture there would be no need to 
> consider "replacement" as a necessary choice.

Such an architecture is already in place (as you would know if you had
taken the time to look at the code). The point is just that about 70% of
the code is UI code (and a lot of that code uses model-view-controller
concepts, yeah). So, if you are willing to rewrite those 70% then you
can build a different UI on top of the GIMP core.

This thread is not appropriate for the gimp-user list, please stop it
here. Questions about the code and the short and long-term plans for
GIMP development can be brought up and discussed on the gimp-developer

To the anonymous poster who started it, can you now please unsubscribe
yourself from this list and take your pointless ramblings elsewhere?
Thank you.


Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to