Hi,
Simon Budig <Simon.Budig@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Ok, I think we had a lot of arguments now. Could we try to agree on the
> following:
>
> 1) Currently Gimp CVS depends on Gtk+ CVS, because the improvements
> made in Gtk+ CVS (over 1.3.6) are very important for the lead
> developers.
>
> 2) When the first release of GTK+ with the fixed api appears
> (aka 1.3.7) Gimp CVS will depend on the earliest possible
> GTK+-Tarball.
>
> 3) When a bug in all GTK+-tarballs *massively* disturbs the GIMP
> developers and this bug is fixed in CVS we could make an exception
> to rule No. 2. However, this should be discussed on the Mailinglist.
Yes, please.
I don't understand why the discussion about depending on the CVS HEAD
version of GTK+ came up in the first place. Of course we will try our
best to be compatible with a GTK+ developers release. Noone will have
to recompile his GTK+ each day just to take part in Gimp development.
I wonder what made Kelly think this would be the case. It's probably
bad experience with GTK+ ports back in the old days. GTK+ development
as it happens now is a very strictly organized process and I'd say we
can take the risk to trust Owen & Co.
I do believe that after the port is finished (very soon now) it will
be much easier to work with the GIMP code. Large parts of the core will
not even be dependant on GTK+ and the clean separation between different
parts of the core will make it easier for one developer to concentrate
on hacking on just one of those parts. This alone should make it way
easier for developers with limited time to participate.
Salut, Sven
PS: I would like to mention that we all have to work for a living and
noone of us can spend 120 hours a week on GIMP development.
