* Sven Neumann <sven@xxxxxxxx> [030619 17:18]: > Hi, > > <pcg( Marc)@goof(A.).(Lehmann )com> writes: > > >> When, if not now, do you want to increase the major version number? > > > > When there is a major change (e.g. gegl, cmyk). Using another > > toolkit is not a major change at all to me. Using the same internal > > representation for images, having the same features, simply doesn't > > warrant the new major number. > > OK, so replacing the approx. 8,000 lines of code in the base directory > with GEGL would be considered a major feature. The fact that the other > 230,000 lines of code that make up the application have been > substantially rewritten counts as a minor improvement only? Sorry, I > cannot follow you on this argumentation. The only valid argument for not bumping the major version is the fact that it earlier has been announced that it will happen after some named features and technologies have been integrated. Whether these technologies represent a big change or not is irrelevant, in an continusly evolving application like Gimp quantum leaps of functionality is unlikely. When GEGL is initially integrated with Gimp no additional features will probably be seen by the user, thus no quantum leap,. after that (I hope), more features og Gimp will take advantage of the approach GEGL takes to image processing, but again no quantum leaps,. is this an /pippin -- .^. /V\ Øyvind Kolås, Gjøvik University College, Norway /(_)\ <oeyvindk@xxxxxx>,<pippin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ^ ^
