Re: [Gimp-developer] The name Gimp
if it were more canonical, people would already be calling it Gnu IMP or IMP). That's fair enough.. IMP *is* a better name (and people who object to it on religious grounds probably are terminally humorless), Actually I think there are quite a few people who would be more open to using the Gimp if the development community were screened for religious preferences. I don't see why it's OK to offend the Christian users, but not ok to offend just the 'prudes'. We could fork the project to only include Christian developers, thus... uh... you all *are* getting this is sarcasm, right? Sorry, commenting in this thread is like eating Skittles! Monty ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] The name Gimp
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Laxminarayan Kamath kamat...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 10:15 AM, David Gowers 00a...@gmail.com wrote: Call it the Gnu IMP. This has to be facetiousness, doesn't it? What about FreeMI ? standing for Freedom to Manipulate Images? *if* the GTK people want to rename accordingly, even that would sound nice FreeTK Oh... wow. Almost 8 years ago to the day, a Slashdot user in a comment proclaimed 'Vorbis is the stupidest name ever given to a piece of software. it should have a kick-ass cutting edge name like FreeMP3!. A great deal of labor, a great deal of love and even more time went into the Gimp. I should think it common courtesey that the parents get to name the child and it's a bit rude to even bring it up otherwise. Besides, you're at leat 15 years late. This baby's in high school. Monty ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] FW: GIMP, GEGL and raw image formats
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 5:49 AM, us3...@web.de wrote: And if GEGL provides this ability by default, why not using it in GIMP? :) I believe that is exactly what's planned. It's alot of work and so will take time. It's also the case that GEGL is not as complete as Gimp, at least not yet. It makes no sense to adopt GEGL if it means eliminating most of the Gimp's existing features to do so. GEGL itself must be finished first. Monty ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] We should go for a single-window mode in 2.8
No objections--- mostly I would urge developers to plan what they're going to do, make the changes, and stick to it. I know that's always been the plan but it doesn't feel like it when you're using the different versions. The random UI changes that appear in each release throw off folks who use the Gimp day to day and have to keep relearning behaviors that they are comfortable with or have become muscle memory over years. It would be like ^x being remapped in every release of emacs. Sure the original isn't intuitive but it's far more important to JUST STOP CHANGING IT. :-) All the window wanking with different UI/WM behavior in every version is just starting to feel like destructive churn :-( I know there are reasons, I'm just saying keep it in mind as one more competetive pressure. Monty ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
