Thus spoke Nick Lamb > >From the user's perspective The Gimp is part of GNOME. For 1.2 this Depends on the user. Some (not me) Linux users may see this cuz it looks similar. I doubt AIX or IRIX users would see it that way. And a lot of Gimp users are using IRIX - high profile users in Hollywood. > won't be really true, but only because of lack of development time to > handle the changes. Is there serious concern here that user's will > NOT want a GNOME-enabled Gimp in 2001 or 2002 when the 1.3 series > might reasonably be expected to conclude with a new stable release? GNOME-enabled is one thing. GNOME-dependent is another. Requiring GNOME libs on non Linux platforms may not be appreciated. If GNOME dependency is added, a determination on the difficulty on getting GNOME libs on non-Linux platforms has to be made. Since I don't currently use GNOME (I don't happen to need the added functionality that it currently offers) I don't know much about how portable it's become. But GTK and Gimp, at least, run on lots of platforms. Maybe that means GNOME is also fairly portable. > I suppose we might conclude that vendors will ship only KDE, in which > case maybe those wacky Qt people will show up again and threaten to > code a replacement Kim*g*sh*p if we won't re-write Gimp in C++ :) The world doesn't live just on Linux. Gimp runs on other platforms. That's a bigger issue, IMHO. Making it behave nicely under the GNOME or KDE environments is less difficult. -- Michael J. Hammel | There are always women who will take men on their The Graphics Muse | own terms. If I were a man I wouldn't bother to mjhammel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | change while there are women like that around. http://www.graphics-muse.com Ann Oakley, British sociologist, author.
