Dave Neary ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Manish Singh wrote:
Dave, ask yourself why you replied to this. The thread was long finished,
and *you* certainly didn't contribute anything meaningful to it. And if
you must reply to this, don't clutter the list with it further.
My contribution was
I would like to point out that even if you feel compelled to
respond to a rude comment (usually it is better to be silent),
you still have the choice whether to be more rude or less rude.
Being more rude will almost always escalate the problem.
At this point the evolution of this discussion is
Hi,
Manish Singh wrote:
Dave, ask yourself why you replied to this. The thread was long finished,
and *you* certainly didn't contribute anything meaningful to it. And if
you must reply to this, don't clutter the list with it further.
My contribution was limited to showing that there is at least
Hi,
Manish Singh wrote:
snip
But it's pretty
clear that you never bother to do any research before posting.
snip
You must
have some weird sort of logic goes on in your head that made you conflate
these things.
snip
But your postings leave the impression that you do not understand
it.
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 09:11:49PM +0200, David Neary wrote:
Hi,
Manish Singh wrote:
snip
But it's pretty
clear that you never bother to do any research before posting.
snip
You must
have some weird sort of logic goes on in your head that made you conflate
these things.
snip
Manish Singh wrote:
snipped out: the fact that clueless Robin completely missed the point that
there was plenty of refactoring done into GPL libraries, quite independent
of the PDB infastructure.
[...]
misinformation about the GIMP project. He completely deserves to be called
on his lack of
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 07:19:20PM -0400, Christopher Curtis wrote:
Manish Singh wrote:
snipped out: the fact that clueless Robin completely missed the point that
there was plenty of refactoring done into GPL libraries, quite independent
of the PDB infastructure.
[...]
misinformation about
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 12:44:51AM -0700, Robin Rowe wrote:
Dave,
It seems like you're limiting refactoring to code re-use via
extraction to libraries.
No, I'm using the same definition that Mat refers to:
Refactoring is a disciplined technique for restructuring an existing body
of
Hi,
Robin Rowe wrote:
Refactoring is a disciplined technique for restructuring an existing body
of code, altering its internal structure without changing its external
behavior. - Martin Fowler on http://www.refactoring.com/
This is exactly what happened to the code in /app between 1.2 and 2.0 -
Dave,
It seems like you're limiting refactoring to code re-use via
extraction to libraries.
No, I'm using the same definition that Mat refers to:
Refactoring is a disciplined technique for restructuring an existing body
of code, altering its internal structure without changing its external
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
Robin Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I honestly am not sure what the process for moving code to libgimp
is... essentially it is just moving the code to a library, and
then adding a wrapper (if required) around those functions to
expose them to the PDB.
Good technical
Hi Robin,
Robin Rowe wrote:
Good technical anwer, thanks.
Apparently I got it wrong.
Anyway - I just improved my understanding with a concrete example.
Let's take gimp_layer_add_alpha() as the example (the function adds an alpha
channel to an RGB background layer that doesn't have one yet).
Hi,
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My understanding came from looking at libgimpthumb
Well, I was talking about libgimp explicitely since I think that's
what the question was all about. Of course libgimpbase, libgimpcolor,
libgimpmath, libgimpthumb and libgimpwidgets play a completely
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Following what you (Sven) said in the previous mail, it also seems
like the libgimp parts are independent of the original code, and calls
the original functions via a PDB proxy, so licence issues wouldn't
come into it.
Well, there are
Hi,
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A GIMP plug-in is a completely different process space than the GIMP
core. Information is passed via a wire protocol which is implemented
at both ends using LGPL code. I don't see how this is different from
viewing the GIMP as a server, and the
Dave Neary wrote:
I write a GPL network daemon (say red carpet). Someone write a non-GPL
compliant client (say an LGPL encapsulation of the RedCarpet XML-RPC
protocol to allow proprietary implementations). Now that library is
calling GPL code, albeit via a network protocol. Is the client
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 01:12:03PM +0200, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But let's take an example...
I write a GPL network daemon (say red carpet). Someone write a non-GPL
compliant client (say an LGPL encapsulation of the RedCarpet XML-RPC
protocol to allow proprietary
Dave Neary wrote:
A GIMP plug-in is a completely different process space than the GIMP
core. Information is passed via a wire protocol which is implemented at
both ends using LGPL code. I don't see how this is different from
viewing the GIMP as a server, and the plug-in as a client. Or
Sven,
Just to clarify for others reading along, my question is not about linking
GPL and LGPL. It is about cut-and-pasting code from GPL into LGPL during
refactoring. With the benefit of hindsight years later, it seems a
maintainer doing code clean-up should find application code that would
Hi Robin,
Robin Rowe wrote:
How do you get permission to move GIMP code from GPL into LGPL?
Basically we do this so rarely that is hasn't been a problem so far to
get permissions from everyone who touched the code in question.
For years you have been saying that something that makes
Hi,
Robin Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pardon me if I misspoke based on recollection. I have now referred
back to your post of December 2, 2002. You said:
[ We often apply patches from people that don't have CVS commit
access. I'd like to see the names of the patch authors in the list of
Hi,
Robin Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I honestly am not sure what the process for moving code to libgimp
is... essentially it is just moving the code to a library, and
then adding a wrapper (if required) around those functions to
expose them to the PDB.
Good technical anwer,
22 matches
Mail list logo
