Hi, On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:29 +0100, David Marrs wrote: > Sven indicated that this idea has already been considered and rejected by the > team and that I should bring it up for discussion here before proceeding any > further. We haven't really discussed and rejected this particular idea. The point here is just that the current rule is that the GIMP team only provides the source code. The creation, distribution and maintainance of binary packages has been left to other parties. The current website tries to explain this point and only gives recommendations for binary packages. In my opinion we should stick to this rule. It would make a lot of sense to make it easier for the user to locate our recommendations for binary packages. If user agent detection helps to remove one or two clicks, then I am fine with that. But if there's a download button on the front-page that directly instantiates the download, then we are effectively providing binary packages. It doesn't matter if the packages are hosted elsewhere. To the user it will appear as if we would provide the binaries. If we decided that we want to do this, then we should probably really provide the binaries and we would have to move things like the Win32 user FAQ (http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/faq.html) and the gimp-app bug-tracker (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-app) to gimp.org and to our bug-tracker. I don't think we are prepared to do that. Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
