>> The comparison to GNOME is interesting. That project has a long time >> reputation of being feature Nazis. They know best and anyone who does not >> agree is just wrong. The job of a user interaction architect does not involve pleasing every living creature out there. What it does involve is listening to people, understanding what their real needs are and then designing interactions and UI. For years GIMP had been criticized as a project that was lacking focus. It was trying to be everything and failed at that. Now that we have a focus and we've changed UI to match the product vision, do you know what's happening? I've been monitoring teh interwebz closely regading v2.8 and the save/export change, and what I see is a consistently positive reaction from folks we are targeting: professional web designers, 3D artists etc. They don't even need the explanation why this change is useful: they already know it, it's how they expect things to work, and they welcome this change. So within our product vision apparently we are doing it right. Yes, someone somewhere will always disagree. And you know what? They have a choice, be it Cinnamon instead of GNOME, or Krita instead of GIMP. This is why we like other projects so much: when some people disagree with what we do, we can tell them -- hey, here is a nice app you might like trying instead of GIMP. Whether you see this choice is entirely up to you. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
