On 10/8/07, Andrew Young <joven@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > David, > > Interesting. GEGL sounds very much in line with a lot of the ideas I have > about how to approach the problem. Is this seen as the future of GIMP's > core? Image representation, certainly. Gimp's core -- maybe. That would depend on how it interacts with the procedural database. > How big an effort is the port to GEGL expected to be? It sounds like > an exciting time to join the development team. We'll know once it's started :) > > You mentioned that GEGL integration is slated for 2.4...2.6 development. > Where can I find more information on plans for GIMP's development cycles? > Are these documented somewhere on developer.gimp.org? > AFAIK no, it was decided fairly informally, like in many OSS things -- people talked, it became the accepted idea over time, and nobody much mentioned it outside of the GEGL-developer and GIMP-developer mailing lists where it was discussed. Officially I believe Sven has said something to the effect of 'there is no roadmap; people implement things because it's fun or they need it, not because there is a deadline.' _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
