On 16 Dec 2002 12:33:39 +0100, Sven Neumann <sven@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > RaphaXl Quinet <quinet@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > This is wrong. The plan was that Film Gimp and GIMP would merge > > around version 2.0 (you can check the gimp-dev mailing list archives > > from 2000 for some statements about that). This did not mean that any > > project would cease to exist, but rather that one tool (or at least a > > common codebase) would support the features that are necessary for > > both projects. > > actually there was no plan to merge the two projects. Instead the idea > was to provide a framework for image manipulation that fits the needs > of both still image and movie editors. [...] Well, this is more or less what I meant when I wrote the statements above. I knew that the old Gimp16 (Film Gimp) core would not be merged into the current GIMP because the work had already started on GEGL. The "merge" that I had in mind would have involved the migration of the Film Gimp frame manager and film-specific plug-ins to the new GIMP core based on GEGL. And as I wrote above, this did not mean that any project would cease to exist. But as I have already explained in a previous message, the exact plans for Film Gimp and GEGL were not discussed on the mailing list. They were mentioned by non-developers, but not by those working on GEGL and Film Gimp (except for the mentions on the film.gimp.org home page in 2000). So I would have to check with Calvin Williamson or Caroline Dahllof and ask them what they had in mind for Film Gimp and the film-specific code and plug-ins when they started working on GEGL. But I doubt that they intended to drop all film-specific stuff once GEGL and GIMP 2.x would be ready, so they probably planned some kind of merge later. > This idea is however very different from the approach taken by the > current Film GIMP developers which seem to prefer to work on a > stone-old code base. In the first message that I posted to the filmgimp mailing list, I saw a great opportunity for Film Gimp to get closer to the current code base when I noticed that one of the top goals for Film Gimp was "Bring the codebase up from 1.0.4 to rendezvous with Gimp 1.2.3". I suggested to aim for 1.3.x instead of 1.2.3, because 1.2.3 is already a bit old and 1.3.x has a much cleaner code (more object-oriented, cleaner separation between user inteface and core, etc.) and has better support for multiple platforms thanks to the new GTK 2.0. Unfortunately, the result of this proposal and the discussion that followed was that the goal of bringing Film Gimp closer to GIMP was removed from the Film Gimp home page and some rather negative statements about the GIMP were posted on the public web site and on the mailing lists. This is exactly the opposite of what I was hoping for and I feel rather bad about this although I do not know how this mess could have been avoided. I am still hoping, though... There would be so much to gain for the Film Gimp users and developers by porting it to GTK+ 2.0 and aligning its core to GIMP 1.3.x or by aiming directly for GEGL and GIMP 2.x. -Raphaël
