Hi,
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:48 +0300, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
Well, there _had been_ a beta version of the list (to which several
people including myself contributed) and since then nothing has
happened, so I was wondering if you still liked that idea ;-)
I did not like any of the beta
On Jan 25, 2008 10:06 PM, Sven Neumann wrote:
I think it would be a lot more useful if we would just collect a list of
tasks that we consider important, without sticking them into a
particular release time-frame.
This is what Inkscape guys do. They have a roadmap based on a rough
estimation,
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 20:03 +, William Skaggs wrote:
I think it would be a lot more useful if we would just collect a list of
tasks that we consider important, without sticking them into a
particular release time-frame. That will make it easier for new
developers to participate.
From: Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, we have that for 2.6. We didn't put publish it. But we discussed
these points and agreed on a roadmap for 2.6. The question is, do we
gain anything if we published such a roadmap officially? I am afraid
that the only result would be that people will
From: Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps if we could first decide what the purpose of the roadmap/task
list should be. I tried to raise that question when we started with this
topic. But no one ever attempted to answer it. So before we start this
again, can we have this discussion,
On 24 January, 2008, Sven wrote
I don't think we want to publish something and call it a roadmap.
But we had the plan to make a list of important tasks that outline
where GIMP is heading and what we consider important to work
on. Since there doesn't seem to be enough interest among the
