Hi Raphaël! I wasn't really serious as I wrote about the "evil pho****" ;-)) My intention was just to point that a lot of dev. don't like to hear "photoshop can this and it does that - why is there still any difference between PS and GIMP????" but stop - let's concentrate on important things like 2.4... Best Regards Danko Raphaël Quinet wrote:> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:04:08 +0200, Danko Dolch <forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:> >> 01. Yes good idea (but never speak out the evil word pho***o* - dev. are >> a bit sensitive to it ;-)>> >> Just a little thing that I would like to clarify: mentioning Photoshop> or other products on this list is perfectly OK.>> If anybody on this list feels offended of feels compelled to react> strongly when someone mentions Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, Windows,> Adobe, Microsoft or some other proprietary products or companies,> then they do not belong here. Feel free to have constructive> discussions and to compare GIMP with other products here. Other> programs also have great features, so describing these features and> their pros and cons can be a nice way to make GIMP even better.>> However, there are some things that you should avoid:>> - Assuming that everybody knows what you mean when you talk about> some specific feature of another program. I do not have a copy of> Photoshop (*) and most GIMP developers do not have one either. I> have not seen nor used any recent version of Photoshop. So if you> mention some specific feature of another program, please be sure> to describe it precisely instead of just saying that we should> implement this or that like in Photoshop.>> - Assuming that we want to have the same features as another> program. With the help of Peter, we have developed a vision for> GIMP: http://developer.gimp.org/gimpcon/2006/index.html#vision> Features that do not fit in the GIMP vision will probably not be> implemented. Among other things, GIMP does not try to copy> Photoshop or MS Paint.>> - Assuming that we will implement some useful feature in the same> way as another program. There is often more than one way to> implement something. Each solution has advantages and> disadvantages. We should always try to implement the solution> that fits best together with other GIMP features. So when you> describe a feature, try to describe its purpose (what does it> do? why is it useful? to whom?) before describing how it works.>> Most of the comments on the list that were complaining about a> message mentioning Photoshop were due to one of the reasons given> above. The complaints that were not due to one of these reasons> can probably be ignored. So feel free to mention other products> or programs here, as long as you provide useful information.>> By the way, there is no need to censor or change the name of a> product or company when you mention it (Ph*t*sh*p, Windoze, ...)> We can speak like grown-ups. Or try to. ;-)>> So these were just my 2 cents to avoid spreading misconceptions> about what is OK and what is not OK on this list...>> -Raphaël>>> (*) I might still have a CD with Photoshop 4.0 LE for Windows 95> that that came with my scanner. But my old Win95 PC has not> been booted since a very long time. And a 10 years old copy> of Photoshop is probably irrelevant for most comparisons.> _______________________________________________> Gimp-developer mailing list> Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer> _______________________________________________Gimp-developer mailing listGimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
