On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 10:47:42AM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote: > > > Also, if you really want comparison by numbers, than the number of > > people writing that gimp-2.0 will have cmyk is certainly larger than > > the number of magazine people you talked to. > > > > And this is no wonder, as this has been mentioned publicly a lot of > > times. > > Sure, I don't wonder, after all that's what we told them 3 years > ago. We've been telling them for a couple of years might be a more precise description (for some definition of we, not including e.g. me :-) The meme has its own life now... > Whenever a new GIMP 1.3 release is announced, people ask when > we will finally start to port it to 2.0. There aren't really so many > people out there that know about the plans for 2.0 we made three years > ago. Don't let google fool you; from the discussions I followed > lately, I came to the impression that people expect a GIMP 2.0 > release. Well, the trailing 2s disease is quite widespread among Gtk+ apps. I wish Gtk+ versions changed more often and to more silly numbers, so people wouln't be so tempted to adjust versions of everything else... Since anyone who've ever seen a 1.3 screenshot (not speaking about running it) must know it uses Gtk+2, I don't think it would be so hard to fight the Gtk+1 confusion. Anyway the difference with the two confusions is this: - When I thought 2.0 would be GEGL based, support CMYK, 16bit channels, ... and when 2.0 is released I can't see any trace of these, I'm disappointed. - When I thought 1.4 would still be Gtk+1 based, and when it's released I see it's Gtk+2 based, I'm delighted. Regards, Yeti
