Hi Alan,
Alan Horkan wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, David Odin wrote:
> > and as I already said before, using the 2.0 version of gfig would mean
> > to at least port the old version to the HIG standards,
>
> I was suggesting shipping the old unmodified version because it was more
> stable.
I ju
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, David Odin wrote:
> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:28:44 +0100
> From: David Odin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: new gfig [Re: [Gimp-developer] canvas background options]
>
> O
On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 07:13:32PM +, Alan Horkan wrote:
>
> It might help you to understand my negativity when I explain that the
> underlying instability of windows doesn't do the gimp any favours. When
> binaries are available windows is the easiest platform to test on and in a
> way the i
Hi,
Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It might help you to understand my negativity when I explain that
> the underlying instability of windows doesn't do the gimp any
> favours. When binaries are available windows is the easiest
> platform to test on and in a way the instability of the
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 00:31:13 +0100
> From: Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] canvas background options
>
> Hi,
>
> Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
