Hi, <pcg( Marc)@goof(A.).(Lehmann )com> writes: >> I give shit on msoffice but GTK+ is the GIMP ToolKit and we will have >> a hard time to explain why even it's major release numbers diverge. > > Pardon? Why would you ever have a problem explaining why version > numbers of *different* packages *differ*? > > You don't even have a problem of explaining why version numbers for single > files differ, even less so for different packages. > > That GTK+ is the GIMP ToolKit is not at all of any concern, after all, > gimp is the minority of applications using it. GTK+ has evolved. IF you > want to tie the version numbers, better make it a single package. That is a lame argument, really. GIMP and GTK+ used to be a single package, it was called GIMP. There is still a close relationship between the two. Both have come far and IMO both deserve a 2 as major version number. The switch from GTK+-1.2 to 2.0 was a lot smaller than what we have to offer for GIMP now. > You obviously haven't read my mail. Really, I don't see why you are > so pissed off... I don't need to look at the code to see that there > are no major changes, and certainly none of the changes planned for > 2.0 for a long time. Sorry, but I have to disagree. Almost of all the GUI changes that were planned for 2.0 are there. What is missing is a proper redesign of the inner core. That is IMO a much smaller change than what we have achieved sine GIMP-1.2. It will certainly be less visible to the user. Sven
