Hi, Dave Neary <dneary@xxxxxxx> writes: > - Scripting languages and the GIMP - work on ruby or python bindings Another language binding would indeed be a nice project and the Python binding could also be improved. What's Yosh's opinion on the latter? > - Plug-ins: Save for web for example (too small to be a project, > but could be part of one) IMO "Save for Web" is complex enough for a project. > - Effect layers - I think this is fairly straightforward with the > GIMP as it is, it's a nice chunk of a project, and would be a nice > feature for users How is this fairly straightforward with the current architecture? I would rather say that it is currently almost impossible to implement sanely. > 1. Feature freeze 2.4 soon (before the end of May), for release during > the Summer > 2. Create SoC branches for integration of the SoC projects > 3. After release of 2.4, merge successful projects to HEAD, and release > 2.5.0 (GIMP-SoC) in September. Let the branch harden for a month or so, > and release 2.6.0 off that. > 4. Start gegl integration on a branch, if needs be, and integrate that > work into HEAD straight after the release of 2.6.0. I don't see why we should wait with GEGL integration. There are people waiting for the 2.4 release to start this work. It would be a huge mistake to postpone this. The amount of GEGL integration that is planned for the next release is small anyway and is unlikely going to delay the 2.6 release. Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
