Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??

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

 



On Tue, 26 Dec 2000 egger@xxxxxxx wrote:

>  Huh? Don't get it. My bandwidth (64K) and time are also limited and
>  still CVS is much faster than ftping and patching. And in addition you
>  get the benefit not having to care about patches and well, your
>  patches to the GIMP are also much easier to create with a CVS tree.
You know since you take time to answer my posts, I might as well too.
Compared to your "limited" 64k how does 9600 that disconnects every 5
minutes sound to you?  And the fact that downloading something like a full
gimp 1.2.0 would take close to 2 or 3 hours?  And the fact that those 2-3
hours would cost me somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 PLUS telephone
charges?  Now go think again.  I connect a few times a day for a few
minutes to check email and get patches to latest stuff, and even
downloading a 300k patch is bad enough not to bother with anything over
1mb.  Thank you for taking your time to read this.  And if you still
insist on using CVS that would require me to go to www.gimp.org, find out
the CVS server info (that would take as much time as downloading the
1.1.32 to 1.2 patch), and hope that whatever state my gimp tarball is in
going to be acceptable for CVS, which is unlikely, so I am probably going
to end up spending a couple hours trying to get all the little pieces and
redialing in between.  Try it sometime.

And don't tell me about having to care about my patches.  I haven't
downloaded full source code to anything in the last 6 months.  So I should
know what to do with them.  And yes, there is a possibility that total
size of all patches exceeds the size of the current version patched up
from the last one.  But, it's spread over a long period of time and is not
as noticeable.  Having to download full ~8mb of gimp every new version
would certainly kill my interest.

And even linux kernel people provided a patch from 2.3.99 to 2.4.0-test.
This is the only reason I am still able to test 2.4.0 because last time I
got a full 2.3.xx tree was looooong time ago.

And my gimp tarball IS out of sync with whatever is out there, because
somewhere along the way some people decided to or not to include things
like gimp_splash.ppm, there are some brushes I think missing from the
gimpressionist plugin, and latest 1.1.31 patch was missing a number of
.png images from the help dir, etc.  But as long as the code patches
clean, I really don't care.  I don't read help anyway.

So someone who has the time to do so just make a patch and stick it in
gimp/unstable or whatever.  If someone needs it, they will get it.  That
would include me, also.

tc

-- 
・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・
     timecop at japan.co.jp | OA通信サビース株式会社 | NTT DoCoMo
  I thought everything that Linus Torvalds is involved with was divine
  perfection? Must be a problem with NEC and Sony -about Crusoe recall
・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・



[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