Re: Plugins at Sourceforge

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



   From: "Michael J. Hammel" <mjhammel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
   Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 14:31:15 -0700 (MST)
   Cc: gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Gimp Developer List)

   Thus spoke Kelly Lynn Martin
   > I agree entirely.  It is my considered position that the first thing
   > we should with 1.3 is remove all, or virtually all, of the plug-ins
   > from the standard distribution.  Moving them to the gimp-plug-in
   > repository on sourceforge seems practical.  All we need to do is

   Agreed, with a modification:  a review of plug-ins should be done so that a
   set of very useful ones could be left with the core.  This would permit a
   useful, small distribution for *nix distributors to include without having
   to concern themselves about the added extras on sourceforge.  It would also
   allow the core developers to concentrate on architectural issues and let
   another group of plug-in developers grow (over time) to handle the extras.

I agree.  I think that the right question is whether a typical end
user would consider something to be core functionality vs. an addon.
It doesn't really matter how it's implemented; if an end user expects
it as a fundamental part of the application, it's core functionality.

That doesn't mean that the development of the core plugins has to be
centralized; in our case (presuming that printing is considered core
functionality) I don't see any harm in our working on our development
series, and releasing stable code to the Gimp core.  That's
essentially what we're doing right now; I intend 3.0.5 as the version
to get into 1.2, unless we have bugs that are deemed high enough
priority, but 3.1 is under active development.

The more interesting question from our standpoint is what happens when
Gimp 1.3 gets underway.  My intent is to release versions off the 3.1
development tree (or whatever the latest version that at least passes
the paper bag test) into the Gimp development, and then sync up our
latest stable release when Gimp 1.4 or 2.0 gets close to release.  And
yes, I agree with Michael also that 2002 is not a reasonable target
for the next stable release of the Gimp.

-- 
Robert Krawitz <rlk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>      http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf@xxxxxxxxxxxx

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton


[Index of Archives]     [Video For Linux]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]     [gtk]     [GIMP for Windows]     [KDE]     [GEGL]     [Gimp's Home]     [Gimp on GUI]     [Gimp on Windows]     [Steve's Art]

  Powered by Linux