Hi, Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What is wrong about depending on GEGL and have people download and > > compile it separately? GTK+ used to live in the GIMP source tree for > > historical reasons only. I strongly doubt anyone would have wanted to > > move it into the GIMP source tree if it was started as a separate > > project. Why would you want to do this with GEGL now? > > What's wrong with having gegl sources to download with the latest > release on the FTP server, the same way we used to have libaa, libmpg, > libpng and all the other stuff we needed? Up until 1.2.x, we used to > have gtk+ and glib sources with gimp sources. What was wrong with that? Putting the tarballs somewhere close to the GIMP tarball on the FTP server is of course reasonable. But unless I completely misunderstood you earlier, you proposed to include gegl as a virtual CVS module and to include it in the GIMP tarball. That's what we've been discussing here. Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
