On 01/28/2011 12:56 AM, Stephen Greenwalt wrote: > It is huge. Incredible, actually. Who wrote all of this? Wow. To see who wrote all this, visit https://www.ohloh.net/p/gimp/contributors > > A few comments: > > * It seems to work best to put the entire project (all source, and all > build product) under a project folder in the Home directory. > * If possible, that should include a /copy /of any external dependencies > . . . with environment variables (etc) adjusted accordingly > * The project ought to be able to exist in a "*bubble*" . . . so as to > avoid confusion . . . regarding copies of dependencies that might exist > in the OS. I've tried quite a few different setups, and I find this to be the best: http://www.chromecode.com/2009/12/best-way-to-keep-up-with-gimp-from-git_26.html > * Multiple different project versions ought to be able to exist on the > same machine without stepping over each other. As have already been pointed out, you can already do that, just use different --prefix:es > * If we do it right, compiling for Linux vs. Windows vs. OSx ought > require no more than the flip of a switch. The Blender folks, and > others, are moving in that direction. I agree, we should make nightly .rpm, .deb, .exe and .dmg builds. Quite a bit of work left to get there though. > * Shouldn't we standardize on a common development IDE (like Eclipse)? > If I am missing something in that area . . . let me know. If you want a good IDE I recommend Qt Creator. If I were to start fresh today, I would probably use Qt Creator instead of Emacs. Regards, Martin -- My GIMP Blog: http://www.chromecode.com/ "Nightly GIMP, GEGL, babl tarball builds" _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
