On 1/16/07, Sven Neumann <sven@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2.6 has an even minor version number so it's obviously a stable release Obvious only to people who don't need to ask. > series. It will most probably use GEGL at a few places internally, but [...] > 2.6 is to finish some stuff that wasn't completed in time for 2.4 and to > start porting the core to GEGL. Perhaps we should also start porting the > display code to Cairo. But that depends on whether someone wants to work > on this or not. Something to consider, I think, is momentum. I think that people want to be part of a vibrant developer community. If a project does not have this, it may be beneficial to create an artificial one by increasing the number of releases. To this end, it may be wise to make future releases more "bite-sized": 2.6 implements CMS workflow and fixes 2.4 problems. 2.8 introduces Cairo rendering. And then 3.0 can integrate GEGL. GEGL of course has the same problem (limited developers) so it may be wise to do some partial integration where reasonable through the 2.x series to help keep that project going - people want to see the results of their efforts. More releases furthers this goal, and also entices new users to try the new features. This can create a nice feedback loop where lots of little changes can be cleaned up across each release. I don't think that additional stable releases further this goal because the GIMP generally just works. Bug fixes here and there just aren't exciting. Now, I'm not trying to be so bold as to propose a schedule, but it seems that if there were three or four releases this year - 2.4 now, then 2.6, 2.8, and maybe a 2.10 - that's roughly four months per release. Asking people to "wait for the next release to include your plugin" doesn't sound so severe then. The biggest burden I think would fall to the translators, which is something that developers just need to be sensitive to. The 3.0 release doesn't have to be so quick, assuming that GEGL integration upsets things. If timed properly, it may be wise to adapt a schedule to the Google summer of code program. The implication then being that this would complete summer 2009. Of course, that also means that this has to be a reasonable SoC project. Finally, in relation to my first comment, every mailing list has its share of hostile people. If developers truly want a large and vibrant development community, somebody needs to be a welcoming beacon. Condenscending remarks (blah blah is _obvious_) are damaging to that goal. There needs to be a consistent voice that welcomes masses of newbies asking "dumb questions" in hopes that some kernel within that mass are new GIMP developers that just need a little nurturing. (If it _should_ be obvious to someone, replying privately is better because the tone of the list matters.) Also, and this is related to above, I think we (all) should recognize the growing numbers of people running free software on non-free platforms and realize that they are important parts of the user base. Linux, for example, is not as scary to people who are already familiar with and use its software. But in order for them to use that software, it has to be a good experience on that non-free platform. "You mean if I buy a computer with Linux it already has the GIMP installed? Great!" For your consideration, Chris _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
