On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Jeremy Morton <admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > With all due respect, your method of not paying anyone has resulted in 2 > years without a stable release of GIMP. What's your point? It's not like > things are just rosy and there aint nothing to fix. Failure to release in 2 years is not a problem curable with money. Long development cycle is the result of merging more than a few large features early on that took time to mature and stabilize. It's a result of going for "perfect completeness in one go", instead of taking small simple and above all, releasable steps. We will try to address this shortcoming in the next few cycles by trying to keep the main tree in a "releasable" state at all times and add new stuff in small self-contained functional but perhaps feature incomplete chunks. I know Peter disagrees with me and many others on this, because he wants to see his babies "complete", but that's exactly the thinking that got us this long cycle and exactly the thing we need to avoid. Adding more developers, specially paid ones without addressing the causes is not going to improve matters much unfortunately. there will be more things waiting around for those few touches to become releasable pushing the deadline ahead. -- --Alexia _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
