Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Christopher Curtis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On 3/30/07, David Marrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We already get Gimpshop users coming to the mailing lists asking for help and, Would it be a good idea to embrace these users as well? Gimpshop may be a non-supported hack, but hosting a Gimpshop-specific list may provide insight into a larger user base with applicability to the One True GIMP. IE: They're beating at the door, would it be a loss to let them in if only to lend an ear? I don't think hosting a gimpshop-specific list is a good idea, it would imply that we'd support gimpshop. Since we know that it is a badly executed hack and its author apparently is not interested in cooperation, I believe this would be a bad idea. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://simon.budig.de/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Von: Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't think hosting a gimpshop-specific list is a good idea, it would imply that we'd support gimpshop. Since we know that it is a badly executed hack and its author apparently is not interested in cooperation, I believe this would be a bad idea. Isn't maintenance of GIMPshop handled by someone else now? At least I do recall that the original author doesn't (didn't?) maintain it anymore. IMO we should clearly state that GIMPshop isn't supported on the GIMP lists - then people can still asks questions, but they do know that they cannot expect answers, simply because there's no knowledge about this changed distro. The worst part of the badly executed hack is that GIMPshop is distributed as a full-blown installer package. If someone would distribute only the changed parts (menus, translations, ...) which could be used as a removable overlay over an existing GIMP, keeping it up to date might become much easier. Michael -- Feel free - 10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat ... Jetzt GMX TopMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Hi, On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 11:39 +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote: I don't think that it would be a problem. Over the years, Jernej's installer has evolved into something that can only be described as an official package for Windows. Regarless of what we state about it, I bet that most users consider it as the GIMP for Windows. Providing a one-click download button is unlikely to cause more problems or confusion. In my opinion it would. Users wouldn't know where to get information about the installer they just downloaded or where to report problems with it. I strongly agree that it makes sense to streamline the download procedure on the web-site. But we would IMO go too far if there was a button on the front-page that would download the installer without providing any further information. We should IMO keep a Download button and we should try to figure out the user's operating system to make it as simple as possible to get to the page where we explain that the GIMP team only provides the source code and where we point people to the binary installer. We should also encourage Jernej to provide a single installer for GTK+ and GIMP. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
On 3/30/07, David Marrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We already get Gimpshop users coming to the mailing lists asking for help and, Would it be a good idea to embrace these users as well? Gimpshop may be a non-supported hack, but hosting a Gimpshop-specific list may provide insight into a larger user base with applicability to the One True GIMP. IE: They're beating at the door, would it be a loss to let them in if only to lend an ear? Chris ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Sven Neumann wrote: In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks, then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. I think opening in a new window/tab would be a strong indication that the user is leaving the gimp site. Whether or not I agree with linking to direct downloads will depend a lot on how fool proof and reliable the said binary turns out to be. But if it does (as I'm sure it will) turn out to be solid, then I don't really see a problem. Otherwise, I agree that cutting down on clicks is still a good compromise. We already get Gimpshop users coming to the mailing lists asking for help and, far from being linked to, I don't think it's even mentioned on the website, so I'm not sure the support thing is really in issue. You could paint it in red letters on the front of the website and someone won't read them. At the end of the day, we can always remove the links if they turn out to cause a problem. Davidm ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
I don't see why providing links to recomended binaries on the front page would put any more responsibility on us. We already direct users to recomendeded binaries, and as long as we continue to be clear that we don't build those binaries ourselves, why should we not make it easier to reach those? The content of a website should be organized in such a way that the most usable information should be the most reachable, and I am pretty confident that most visitors on gimp.org looks for binaries, hence we should have binaries on the front page. I don't see why we would have to also host the Win32 FAQ etc because of this. Just link to those external pages. Sure, coherency is important but let's not take it to the extreme, let's focus on providing a pragmatic gimp.org. Martin Nordholts les, just link to themourselves Sven Neumann skrev: Hi, On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:29 +0100, David Marrs wrote: Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any further. We haven't really discussed and rejected this particular idea. The point here is just that the current rule is that the GIMP team only provides the source code. The creation, distribution and maintainance of binary packages has been left to other parties. The current website tries to explain this point and only gives recommendations for binary packages. In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks, then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:29:26 +0100, David Marrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was suggested on the gimp-web mailing list that we could provide direct links to binary packages for popular platforms such as Windows or Mac, based on user agent detection. The link would be provide from the home page - see http://next.gimp.org/ for a taster. I liked the proposal (presuming reliable packages for 2.4 are made available) and can provide the necessary code. Sigh! That reference to next.gimp.org should not have been mentioned outside the gimp-web mailing list. It's not a secret (anyone is free to join the gimp-web list or the discussions on IRC) but we should make sure that the new design is not discussed too early on various blogs or web sites, otherwise this would ruin the effect for the 2.4 release. So if you have visited that site and you want to comment on it, please limit your discussion to the gimp mailing lists or IRC channels, but do not spread this URL before 2.4 is released. Thanks! -Raphaël ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:20:58 +0200, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. I don't think that it would be a problem. Over the years, Jernej's installer has evolved into something that can only be described as an official package for Windows. Regarless of what we state about it, I bet that most users consider it as the GIMP for Windows. Providing a one-click download button is unlikely to cause more problems or confusion. The situation may be different for Mac users or users of other platforms, but then again if the web site statistics are still the same as when I last looked at them, then the majority of our visitors are using IE on Windows. It is reasonable to think that a fair number of these visitors are interested in getting the installer for GIMP on Windows. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. Moving the Win32 user FAQ to www.gimp.org may or may not be a good idea. I think that Jernej should state his opinion on that. Regarding gimp-app, I am not sure because we do not (or did not) get too many Mac visitors and I do not know to what extent they perceive the gimp-app package as official. This may change if the native GTK+ port evolves, but for the moment I am not sure that we even need to have a direct download button for Mac packages. -Raphaël ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:09:05 +0200 From: Martin Nordholts [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't see why providing links to recomended binaries on the front page would put any more responsibility on us. We already direct users to recomendeded binaries, and as long as we continue to be clear that we don't build those binaries ourselves, why should we not make it easier to reach those? Because whatever disclaimers etc. you use, users will see the binaries as coming from the GIMP project, and will blame you if there are any download problems or corrupted (or trojaned!) binaries. The content of a website should be organized in such a way that the most usable information should be the most reachable, and I am pretty confident that most visitors on gimp.org looks for binaries, hence we should have binaries on the front page. I don't see why we would have to also host the Win32 FAQ etc because of this. Just link to those external pages. Sure, coherency is important but let's not take it to the extreme, let's focus on providing a pragmatic gimp.org. Martin Nordholts les, just link to themourselves Sven Neumann skrev: Hi, On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:29 +0100, David Marrs wrote: Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any further. We haven't really discussed and rejected this particular idea. The point here is just that the current rule is that the GIMP team only provides the source code. The creation, distribution and maintainance of binary packages has been left to other parties. The current website tries to explain this point and only gives recommendations for binary packages. In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks, then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
On 3/29/07, Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: And then grab the gtk+, and gimp win binaries. And all those pages are in English only - (most people in my target audiences are not proeficient enough in English - so, just imagine all those pages are in some language you don't understand, and you will see it is rather unprobable that one would click on the correct links at each of then) Which reveals another question -- whether new gimp.org is supposed to be i18n enabled (a question, not quite related to this list, so I would appreciate offlist answers). Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Dear all, It was suggested on the gimp-web mailing list that we could provide direct links to binary packages for popular platforms such as Windows or Mac, based on user agent detection. The link would be provide from the home page - see http://next.gimp.org/ for a taster. I liked the proposal (presuming reliable packages for 2.4 are made available) and can provide the necessary code. Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any further. My argument for including one-click downloads would be ease-of-use primarily for Mac and Windows users; I don't see the benefit for Linux users as we would probably want to install stable Gimp through our package managers. Please note that the proposal is not necessarily for hosting binaries on the gimp website but for providing deep links to the binaries from the website. If anyone has any issues with this proposal please raise them here. If I don't get any replies to this post I'll presume there are no objections. :) Regards, David Marrs ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-Developer] One-click binary downloads via the gimp website
Hi, On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:29 +0100, David Marrs wrote: Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any further. We haven't really discussed and rejected this particular idea. The point here is just that the current rule is that the GIMP team only provides the source code. The creation, distribution and maintainance of binary packages has been left to other parties. The current website tries to explain this point and only gives recommendations for binary packages. In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks, then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
