Re: [Gimp-developer] AUTHORS.xml

2003-11-19 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi,

Carol Spears [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 2) what sort of information should be included there.  it is an
 interesting area.  Some contributers might be looking for jobs (or
 dates) and would like to have email and homepage and maybe annual income
 goals -- shoe size, i dunno.  Others might want to remain just a name in
 this list.  The question here would be As a contributer to free
 software, what would you like to have know about you in this file?

Let me add one or two sentences on this to avoid confusion.  The idea
is to keep this file in the source tree, not to install it. It would
serve as a database for us and for others who want to know who is
actually working on the GIMP project (or has worked on it).  What we
will probably also do is to generate a list of names from this file to
be used by the About dialog.


Sven
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


[Gimp-developer] GimpCon 2004

2003-11-19 Thread David Neary
Hi all,

A while back (quite a while actually) I tried to start a
discussion about where we might have next year's GimpCon. There
were 2 main ideas - the first is to stage something more or less
standalone - 20 odd people turn up somewhere and talk about the
GIMP for 4 days. The second is to piggy-back on an existing
event, taking advantage of the organisation and financing of the
bigger event.

I asked for ideas of events, and offers to organise the location
for the 20 odd people. I also asked for proposals for dates.
Unfortunately, the response was less than I'd expected, which
means I probably didn't ask properly :)

Today a few of us were talking about this on IRC, and a couple of
concrete proposals came up. Well, more sandy-water proposals at
the moment...

1) Lyon

Myself and David Odin live here, we're both active in the local 
LUG and might get some organisational help there, David works in 
a university and has cleared the in principle issue with his 
boss. We would have some rooms in a university, with access to 
the university network, and probably guest accounts on the 
university network. There has been no talk of money, so we don't 
know how much all this access might cost.

Plus: Facilities

Minus: Lyon isn't easy to get to, which means higher transport
costs. Dates after the 25th of June are best.

2) GUADEC

The GNOME Users and Developers Conference is in the process of
organising itself for the last week in June; this is about the
time that I think it would be good to have a conference (around
the time 2.2 comes out), before we break lots of stuff doing a
gegl migration. 

Plus: Everything will be organised. Lots of smart people around.

Minus: We're not a GNOME app, so we probably won't get travel
expenses paid by the organisers (we can always ask, though -
perhaps we can get a Graphics stream added, and have 4 or 5
people give presentations and get expenses that way). Again,
Norway's not easy to get to. If we are having problems getting
money, sponsorship might be tough (most people liable to sponsor
us will also probably be sponsoring GUADEC)

3) London

Sven knows some people in London who might be prepared to put in
the organisational effort.

Plus: London = cheap transport

Minus: We don't know what facilities will be available. 

Other ideas (conferences we could hijack, or places where people
would be able to organise stuff for us) are welcome, as well as
comments on these.

Please note that I have not talked about money at all really...
IMHO, we need a someone who will handle the money, and a group of
someones who will look for sponsorship. The problem is that we
often need somebody, who could be anybody, but everybody thinks
somebody will do it, and in the end nobody ends up doing it :) So
it would be nice to start naming our somebodies now.

Cheers,
Dave.

-- 
   David Neary,
   Lyon, France
  E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 1.3.22

2003-11-19 Thread Hans Breuer
At 06:37 17.11.03 +, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
I wrote:
  If you are using MSVC, I guess the real question is, is there any
  chance that we will be able to claim supporting a MSVC build out of
  the box with a straight face? 

Hans Breuer writes:
  Probably not, at least not until the issues outlined in

  http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-developer/2003-May/008589.html

The first issue there is about building fontconfig. Why assume
somebody building *GIMP* with MSVC would want to build *everything* it
depends on, too?

Where did I do this assumption ? Though on the other hand I think
it'll help, cause usually The Gimp's usage of the Gimp Toolkit and
Pango does trigger some bugs in the toolkit, which were not noticed
until than or are long time known but simply not fixed.

For debugging purpose with msvc it helps a lot to build a debug 
enabled version of gtk+, pango and glib - i.e. :

nmake -f makefile.msc DEBUG=1

thus linking with msvcrtd.dll. But if one does not want to use 
the M$ debugger, sure it's fine to not build dependencies. 

Though in that case why not (simply) use the mingw build ?

  Though I still have plans to extend Pango to allow 
  'render to bitmap' and 'get glyph outlines' at least with two 
  backends (win32 and FT2), there seems to be noone else interested.

Well, at least for me the issue is that I haven't investigated deeply
enough of this to understand your point...

What issue : Wanting a common api for almost basic font stuff
doable with different backends, to get backend independent 
application source ? 
Wanting only one font configuration, or even font backend per 
application ? 
Or trying to avoid the additional FT2/fontconfig dependency 
at all ?

  almost unmaintained, and requires manual intervention on the builder's
  system. Is manual editing needed for the makefile.msc files? 

  Only if there are files added or removed, so usually not that much
  when getting stable again ...

But surely the current stuff in module.defs, for instance, which
requires you to have the various dependency *sources* unpacked as
siblings to your GIMP source directory, is not a good idea? 
It depends. AFAIK one can as well install only your 'developer
packages' at the configured places with some small adaptions
in modules.defs. But I never tested it cause I'm building
everything from source - usually from cvs ...

The build/win32 stuff should be changed to use pkg-config and *installed*
developer packages of glib, gtk etc.

Why not throw in all the auto* tools to make the configure step take the
same time as the compile step ? But serious: as everyone can easily see 
we have very different approaches how building The Gimp should work.
I'd say to the benefit of giving choices. But it probably does not 
matter much cause we both appear to do it almost on our own.

If there is somebody else interested in compiling The Gimp under
windoze please throw in your opinion. Or even better some
concrete problems which stopped you from providing patches ;-).

Thanks,
Hans
 Hans at Breuer dot Org ---
Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to 
get along without it.-- Dilbert
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer