Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:22:11PM -0300, Monica Kraenzle wrote: > > The users manual version we used is for gimp 2.4, dated December 2007. > > I have uploaded a reduced pdf to show the cover and the interior pages: > http://www.maxishare.net/en/file/8416/gimp-manual-2-4-reduced-pdf.html > > Basicly it's nothing else than a printed version of the electronic > version (and it's NOT mass-distributed). > Basically, it is a _black_and_white_ printed version, which make most screenshots completly useless, at least that pdf is a B&W version. > The only customizations we made is creating a cover and formatting > this electronic manual to a printed manual. All authors and > contributors are credited. License terms and information about what > version as well as a link to the gimp.org site for software and manual > updates etc. are included. > Does that really allow you to put a copyright for the 2008 year on page 4? > As soon as there would be available an updated 2.6 manual we could > update the edition as well. > Repeat after me: "as soon as there would be available an updated 2.6 manual we WON'T publish a printed edition, but we will ASK the documentation team what to do, since we don't want to repeat the same errors again and again". > > Many others are distributing CD's with gimp software versions from the > website and are allowed to do so (surely these are also not always the > latest software versions without any bugs) and we printed the > electronic manual on paper ... Yes, they are allowed to do so, some are even contacting us beforehand, and all of them have to distribute the real official package (which is the tar.gz source package, and not an svn or unstable release), and none of them asked us to advertise their CD on our website. Again, I'm speaking in my name, and _not_ in the name of the gimp team (or I would have chosen another email address) Cheers, DindinX -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org
From: Monica Kraenzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:51:02 -0300 But now to go to the book page and give a bad rating to say this is bad quality and the gimp developers say this is not an official manual is not the finest way. Do you consider this as fair? Not only to us but also to all the authors who worked on that version? We had to bad intention at all. >From my experience (as the project lead for Gutenprint), it *is* a real problem when well-intentioned distributors use beta (or old) versions of our software, or make changes without discussing them with us. We've had a few cases of this happen, and the result is that users yell at us for something we didn't do. I've fired off a few angry emails of my own to distributors over things like that. Yes, the license allows you to do what you want, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea to grab a snapshot and publish it as a book, or to distribute it with changes without clearly pointing out the local customizations. In this particular case, it would have saved a lot of hard feelings (not to mention a good bit of work on your part) to have asked about this before publishing it. If nothing else, you would at least have known what version to publish. -- Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project lead for Gutenprint --http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org
On Wednesday 22 October 2008 17:51:02 Monica Kraenzle wrote: > But I also offered to talk about releasing an updated second edition and to > collaborate. Open source is all about collaboration. Jumping out of the bushes and demanding support is not it. > But now to go to the book page and give a bad rating to say this is bad > quality and the gimp developers say this is not an official manual is not > the finest way. If documentation team has not reviewed what you are going to print with that goal, printing, in mind, it can hardly be called official. That and the attribution is are in my humble opinion the things that have stroked the community the wrong way. Attribution is the closest thing for reward the contributors get for their effort and tho they cant demand it, they do expect it as part of good manners. If attribution as individuals is not practical, then as a collective through a name the collective recognizes. I do not think the bad rating giver is even a contributor. It can be anybody who has read this list. A list that is indexed by google quite fast through several list archives. Sven can hardly be blamed for expressing his opinion, that most there seem to share. >Do you consider this as fair? I had nothing to do with the rating, but... Well,I do think it is fair. Support of a community is a great thing to have, but it needs to be earned by doing right by the community and not only by the letter of the law or at least by accepting and acknowledging your mistakes. So far you have done neither, only complained. > Not only to us but also to all the authors who worked on that version? Id suspect the authors are not offended - it is by a "Sarah", isn't it... > We had to bad intention at all. Neither do any of us when pointing out to you what was/is exactly wrong with your approach. It's up to you to decide what you do, now that you know the sentiment of the community. -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org
Am Mittwoch, 22. Oktober 2008 16:20:20 schrieb Karine Delvare: > Monica Kraenzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > > It really sounds funny that you are releasing software and manuals to > > the public with GNU licenses to freely distribute them privately and > > commercially but at the end you don't want people to use the license > > but to ask you before. The right to use and the right to publish does not free a publisher from the responsibility of ensuring a quality end-product. From what I have read here, this responsibility has be entirely neglected in this case. > It doesn't look like you understand the difference between "legally > possible" and "good idea". It's too bad you printed a book of bad > quality just because you didn't contact the documentation team first. > It could have been great to prepare a top-quality version of the manual > with the team and release it as a book. > > It's exactly the same when people take GIMP source code, brand it > "MyPhotoshop" or whatever, and sell it. Then buyers complain that there Not quite exactly the same, as the title of such a piece of software would be different. But in the current case, the title is "Gimp User's Manual", i.e. it is directly related to the Gimp project and the finger will point at all members of the developing team and any contributors if there are bugs. This is the main point why people here are so upset for not being asked before publishing the book in the first place. The people here do want to produce quality software and quality documentation as well. Any editor of a published book that is compiled from articles of different authors (this is what also applies to the GUM) should read through those articles carefully and clear out any questions that might arise from the differences between the article (i.e. the documentation in this case) and the topic (i.e. the actual product in the current stable version) before the final work is going to be published. This is even more true with the Gimp, where the stable product and the documentation are not kept in sync (since keeping them in sync would slow down the software development). just my 2cc Torsten signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org
Le Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:06:14 -0300, Monica Kraenzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > It really sounds funny that you are releasing software and manuals to > the public with GNU licenses to freely distribute them privately and > commercially but at the end you don't want people to use the license > but to ask you before. It doesn't look like you understand the difference between "legally possible" and "good idea". It's too bad you printed a book of bad quality just because you didn't contact the documentation team first. It could have been great to prepare a top-quality version of the manual with the team and release it as a book. It's exactly the same when people take GIMP source code, brand it "MyPhotoshop" or whatever, and sell it. Then buyers complain that there are bugs - of course, by the time they buy it, most bugs are fixed and new features have appeared, but they will never see that. So, this is legally allowed, but the seller shouldn't be surprised when the development team isn't very happy about the situation. Karine ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Monica Kraenzle wrote: > - If you are giving something away with a GNU licence to redistribute = > don't complain that publisher do it and don't complain that we don't > ask for it as it is already permitted within the licence. This is hilarious. You remind me one very unprofessionally written article whose author bashed Oxygen icon theme artists for asking people not to distribute it until KDE4 is out. See, GIMP manual is by no means complete and doesn't even cover features of the current stable version. Open source is about cooperation. This is something you really need to consider, IMHO. Alexandre, *not* saying this on behalf of the team ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org books (Gimp merchandise)
Hi Monica, > Did I missed something about GNU? > I studied the gimp website, all GNU licences written in the manual, > the GNU site etc. We included all pages of the manual within the > book, including all GNU infomations, all author names etc. plus the > informations that there is an updated html onlie manual available at > gimp.org > > I did not see any hint anywhere that we have to ask for approval of a > Gimp doc team and just found out how to contact gimp developers to ask > for adding the book. There is actually nothing illegal printing and selling the copies of the PDF version. Although it's not best practice. PDF versions published on docs.gimp.org are not final versions, they're 'snapshot' versions meaning that they include all small an major glitches (spelling errors, layout problems, etc). So with all the glitches in the PDF version and including that it's outdated, I don't think your customers will be satisfied all in all. That could also mean that people think, we as in the contributors to the manual, published our manual on our own through you, which is not the case. > I don't want to be offensive but is Gimp and the Gimp manual GNU or > not? It is GNU. The manual is not published under GPL it is published under GFDL. > Although I noticed later on that somewhere it's written somewhere that > the gimp doc team could be contacted to ask if there is any updated > version. > As a publishing company has to mention one main author we used "Susan > A. Jones" as a editor pen name of the book. Technically there is no > way to use 20 or what authors as authors when you publish a book. But > all authors are credited in the book pages itself. I do think that is possible ... at least technically. So finally - you can publish the PDF versions of the manual whereever you want to as long as you stick to the license (naming Susan A. Jones as an editor violates the license probably.). But by publishing it without asking you can't expecting any help from us. Greetings, -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org books (Gimp merchandise)
Hi Monica, On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 08:29:41AM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote: > > Yes, it is a pdf formatted version of http://docs.gimp.org . I wonder what you did? The PDF versions we published on http://docs.gimp.org were still considered as work-in-progress. Additionally they are very much outdated. > > We formatted the gnu-labeled PDF version for book printing and > > designed this cover. All pages are completed including all gnu > > informations. > > > > GNU Image Manipulation Program > > December 2, 2007 > > REVISION HISTORY > > $Revision: 2129 $ 2007-07-15 romanofski > > It's a somewhat unprofessional approach to print and sell the user > manual without getting in contact with the authors beforehand, isn't it? > And then you put "Susan A. Jones" as the author. Who is that? I don't > remember having seen that name among the contributors to the GIMP user > manual. I have to agree with Sven here. The manual was written by a lot of authors and people who spend their free time on the manual. I can't remember that you gave either me or someone else of the documentation team a note that you published the book. It would have been much better to post a mail to the docs mailing list: http://www.gimp.org/mail_lists.html -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org books (Gimp merchandise)
Hi, On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 01:45 -0300, Monica Kraenzle wrote: > Yes, it is a pdf formatted version of http://docs.gimp.org . > > We formatted the gnu-labeled PDF version for book printing and designed this > cover. > All pages are completed including all gnu informations. > > GNU Image Manipulation Program > December 2, 2007 > REVISION HISTORY > $Revision: 2129 $ 2007-07-15 romanofski It's a somewhat unprofessional approach to print and sell the user manual without getting in contact with the authors beforehand, isn't it? And then you put "Susan A. Jones" as the author. Who is that? I don't remember having seen that name among the contributors to the GIMP user manual. > Could you help to get this up on the book page? I don't think we want to advertize an outdated copy of the user manual. Definitely not without approval from the GIMP docs team. So please ask them first. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Request to include Gimp Manual Book at Gimp.org books (Gimp merchandise)
Monica Kraenzle wrote: > Title: GIMP - The official Manual What exactly makes this book official? Is it a print of the manual available from http://docs.gimp.org? Michael -- GIMP > http://www.gimp.org | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Wiki > http://wiki.gimp.org | .de: http://gimpforum.de Plug-ins > http://registry.gimp.org | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
