Hi Alan, > I don't think it is a good idea to change the project name. So you kind of answered to yourself... > It is a good sign that the gimp has improved so much that people are only > left with the name to complain about :) I don't complain about the name. > I think it would be a fair compromise to accept patches that make it > easier for those who would like to configure the name. That a non-sense claim. I think that people that get offended by a name have deeper problems. And they should worry first about them instead of changing everybody's minds to their way of thinking. I answer to you, because i work on a window manager with a name that could be considered offensive by spanish-speakers with similar ideas to the users who claim that gimp should change its name. But we didn't intend to offense anyone when we choosed the name, it was just a joke. People who complained about the name understood this when we explained it to them. > If a project as big as Mozilla Firefox allows it name to be changed, why > would it be an issue for the gimp? There was another project called Firebird, so there was a good reason to change it. > Why require people to fork or maintain their own patchsets for the sake of > a little extra configurability. I wouldn't call it configurability. Regards, -- David Gómez Jabber ID: davidge@xxxxxxxxxx
