On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 08:47:40 +0100, gg@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:> I find it rather arrogant to presume that those who can code are the only > ones who can contribute to development and as a consequence anyone who can > code is also an authority on graphic design and UI implementation. You are distorting what Sven said, but this seems to be a rather commonperception and complaint so maybe this deserves some clarifications: Yes, the development of GIMP 2.6 will be mostly developer driven andthere will not be much room left for additional suggestions and otherstuff that is not already in the list of tasks that we are discussinghere. I am not saying that to disappoint you. I am saying thatbecause we have to cope with reality. Here are some reasons: - We have far more ideas than developers. We even have far more *good* ideas than developers. - The development cycle leading to GIMP 2.4 was much too long. It took almost 3 years since the release of GIMP 2.2. The development of GIMP 2.6 should be much shorter so that everybody can benefit from new features and other improvements without having to wait several years between stable releases. But this means that we have to make some hard choices and leave some interesting stuff for later. - The integration of GEGL and the support for higher bit depths is not a trivial task. Although there were great hopes that GIMP 2.6 would have good support for 16 bits per color channel, fancy color spaces and other features that many users are waiting for, we will not be able to get all of that ready in time. We will make some steps in the right direction, but there will still be a lot of work left for after 2.6. So what does that mean? We already know at this point that it will bechallenging to achieve all goals that are mentioned in the draftroadmap for 2.6. Some of these tasks may seem to be rather obscure andmay not bring many visible changes in GIMP 2.6, but they are necessaryso that the releases that will follow 2.6 can support higher bit depths(in the core and in the plug-ins) and many other long-awaited features,including some improvements in the user interface. Considering that we are already struggling with the current list oftasks for which some volunteers exist (there are developers willing tospend some of their spare time working on them), I think that Sven isright when he reminds you that it is not the right time to discussthings that are not in the scope of 2.6 (tasks that are not alreadysupported by a volunteer developer). -Raphaël_______________________________________________Gimp-developer mailing listGimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
