On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:34:45 +0200, Sven Neumann <sven@xxxxxxxx> wrote:> On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 11:39 +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote:> > Providing a one-click download button is unlikely to cause more> > problems or confusion.> > In my opinion it would. Users wouldn't know where to get information> about the installer they just downloaded or where to report problems> with it. Why wouldn't they know? They visit www.gimp.org to get theirsoftware, so it makes sense that they also look around on that samesite if they want to get information or to report problems aboutwhat they just downloaded. Currently, even if they download the binary package from SourceForge,they will anyway have to go back to www.gimp.org if they want to getthe information about how to use Bugzilla to report bugs. And sincewe discussed previously the opportunity to move the installer FAQ togimp.org (if Jernej agrees), the users would find everything theyneed on the web site. > We should IMO keep a Download button and we should try to figure out the> user's operating system to make it as simple as possible to get to the> page where we explain that the GIMP team only provides the source code> and where we point people to the binary installer. We should also> encourage Jernej to provide a single installer for GTK+ and GIMP. Regardless of what we say about it, people do not care if the teamprovides only the source code. As I mentioned previously, the Windowspackage built by Jernej is considered as "the" GIMP package by mostusers and they probably do not know that the only official package fromthe team is the source code. And IMHO, they shouldn't even have toknow. Most Linux users know that when a new package is released (GIMP or anyother software), this usually means that a new version of the sourcecode is out and they either have to build it on their own or to waitfor their favorite distro to update their package. Windows users andMacOS X users do not have the same expectations: they expect to beable to download and install the software immediately. If the Windowsbinary package is not available, then the software is not releasedyet. Since Firefox was cited as an example at the beginning of this thread,I think that we should follow the same example and try to haveinstallers for Windows and MacOS X (if possible) ready when weannounce a new stable release. Other packages that are less popularthan GIMP or Firefox follow the same model, so why couldn't we helpour users in the same way? I know that this is a change compared to our current policy and italso raises some practical problems if we want to have packages readyon time (more pressure on Jernej...) but I think that it would bebetter for the (Windows) users than sticking to the current policy"we only release the source code". -Raphaël_______________________________________________Gimp-developer mailing listGimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
