Hi,
On Mon, 2004-05-03 at 10:01, Dave Neary wrote:
Daniel Rogers wrote:
And if you are not a non-profit you need to pay
taxes, wether or not you make money. (and if GIMP joins GNOME and
abandons TGF, I'm the one that has to pay the 800 dollar minimum tax, I
might add).
I think
Hi,
Nathan Carl Summers wrote:
On Sat, 1 May 2004, David Neary wrote:
Are there any people opposed to closer ties with the GNOME
Foundation?
I don't see any reason why we can't do both: work closely with the GNOME
Foundation now, while the GIMP Foundation is getting off the ground, and
then
On 3 May 2004, at 9:05, Daniel Rogers wrote:
Sven Neumann wrote:
It's not that we wouldn't put a lot of effort into making GIMP work
well on a GNOME desktop. Adhering to FreeDesktop standards is one of
our goals and we are even working towards full GNOME HIG compliance.
The only things
On 3 May 2004, at 12:51, Sven Neumann wrote:
Every time we port GIMP to new features of the GIMP toolkit I
get the strong impression that we are the first using the new
API.
Is this phenomenon constricted to GTK?
--
branko collin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kelly Martin wrote:
I'd be very surprised if the GNOME Foundation passed along *all* funds
untouched donated with a simple earmark for the GIMP to the GIMP people;
I would fully expect them to take an administrative fee of between 5%
and 50% (maybe even more). You might want to have an
On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 05:56:43PM +0100, Adam D. Moss wrote:
(we've enjoyed peripheral use of some of their services
such as CVS for a while).
my personal experience with gnome cvs is really bad.
i am paraphrasing one of the developers i have a great deal of respect
for (paraphrasing since
Hi Dan,
Daniel Rogers wrote:
And if you are not a non-profit you need to pay
taxes, wether or not you make money. (and if GIMP joins GNOME and
abandons TGF, I'm the one that has to pay the 800 dollar minimum tax, I
might add).
I think that everyone should pool in together to pay this. I have
Carol Spears wrote:
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 08:04:04PM +0200, David Neary wrote:
(we use their toolkit and
infrastructure, a few years ago they used to use our toolkit),
did the name change?
as far as i know it is still the gimp tool kit.
There are only a very small number of people who really
On 2 May 2004, at 23:24, Carol Spears wrote:
not using doc format was a really good suggestion,
The solutions mankind has come up with to increase readability are
diverse, and range from using open document formats to using capitals
at the beginning of sentences and for the word 'I'. I
Hi,
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are only a very small number of people who really believe this
to be still the case. It may still be called the GIMP Toolkit (but
more more I've heard it called the GNOME Toolkit), but that is a
historical nod. The GIMP Toolkit is less a GIMP
Hi,
Daniel Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
See the problem I see with the GINPOG attitude and joining GNOME is
that we are saying we are willing to take your money and your time and
your developers, but we are not willing to actually show any support
for you in any way. It's kinda
Sven Neumann wrote:
It's not that we wouldn't put a lot of effort into making GIMP work
well on a GNOME desktop. Adhering to FreeDesktop standards is one of
our goals and we are even working towards full GNOME HIG compliance.
The only things we really want to avoid is to be forced to do any of
Daniel Rogers wrote:
David Neary wrote:
Are there any people opposed to closer ties with the GNOME
Foundation?
Well, GIMP is not part of GNOME, and this assertion was made repeatedly
over the years. Apart from labeling GIMP more of a GNOME program, I
wouldn't oppose (but I don't count much anyway
Hi,
Michael Schumacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thne fears that I - as a Win32 user - have are that by moving closer
to GNOME, GIMP might become too linux-centric. If those fears are
unjustified, I'd be glad to presented the facts that render them
invalid.
No facts, but since GIMP works
On 3 May 2004, Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are only a very small number of people who really believe this
to be still the case. It may still be called the GIMP Toolkit (but
more more I've heard it called the GNOME Toolkit), but that is a
On Sat, 1 May 2004, David Neary wrote:
Hi all,
Myself and Dan Rogers will be meeting with someone from the GNOME
Foundation this week with the intention of having greater
co-operation with them on things like money.
For the moment, I am working under the supposition that the best
option
On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 06:06:54PM +0200, David Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the moment, I am working under the supposition that the best
option available to us is to join the GNOME Foundation. That
means that when we do fundraising, the donations would go to the
GNOME Foundation, and
Hi,
Marc A. Lehmann wrote:
On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 06:06:54PM +0200, David Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the moment, I am working under the supposition that the best
option available to us is to join the GNOME Foundation. That
means that when we do fundraising, the donations would
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 08:04:04PM +0200, David Neary wrote:
(we use their toolkit and
infrastructure, a few years ago they used to use our toolkit),
did the name change?
as far as i know it is still the gimp tool kit.
some of you have children. can you imagine asking them for money?
i
Hi all,
Myself and Dan Rogers will be meeting with someone from the GNOME
Foundation this week with the intention of having greater
co-operation with them on things like money.
For the moment, I am working under the supposition that the best
option available to us is to join the GNOME
David Neary wrote:
Are there any people opposed to closer ties with the GNOME
Foundation?
As long as GIMP wouldn't be in a rush to / obligated to subscribe
to their apalling standards of slaphappy dead-end over-engineering
and 1991-shareware approach to user interface standards then I think
it
21 matches
Mail list logo
