Hi, David Neary <dneary@xxxxxxx> writes: > If that's the case, we're working towards needing a jhbuild or a > garnome for the GIMP, which just doesn't seem right - we're a > desktop application, not a suite of developer libraries and > desktop applications. We have one set of developers, not several > dozens. I don't see what's wrong with needing a jhbuild type of script to ease compilation (not that I have ever felt the need to use jhbuild). GIMP is not a desktop application. It is (or should become if it isn't yet) an image manipulation suite. We have several sets of developers already and I hope that sooner or later it will be several dozens of them. If you are lacking this vision, you are effectively stalling GIMP development. We cannot continue to grow forever, splitting things into smaller packages is the only way GIMP can grow into something really large. Dave, it was you who only yesterday complained about the time that it takes to build GIMP. Now imagine how much time it would take if GAP and gimp-perl were still in there. We are already way beyond the point where the GIMP tarball is handable. It takes hours to run make distcheck in this beast. It takes hours to check it out of CVS and build it. It takes hours to do a release, most of this due to the huge size of the tarball and the shear amount of files that need to be tagged and committed. Face it, GIMP is large. It doesn't fit into a single tarball. Of course, as I said in another mail, such a tarball could be build but it would just be a collection of smaller tarballs and a jhbuild type of script. Sven
