Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp Manual Roadmap proposal

2014-02-07 Thread Joao S. O. Bueno
Hi Roman -
when you talk about a 3.0 manual version in 3.0 - I am with the
impression that the
purposed changes would take place before GIMP 3.0 itself (as the next version
shall be 2.10)

So - it looks like the purposed version numbering would dissociate the
manual version from GIMP's version - is that so?  I think that might
be confusing - although on a second thought it could be
a manageable confusion, if it is clearly specified, inv arious places, that,
for example, gimp-help-2 3.0 refers to gimp-2.10 .

(As for the idea of going github I am of the same opinion as Jehan.
We could put a mirror (fork in github parlor) there - but the
authoritative repository
should, by the reasons listed and maybe some more,
be kept in the gnome infrastructure).


regards,

  js
 --
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list


Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp Manual Roadmap proposal

2014-02-06 Thread Michael Natterer
On Thu, 2014-02-06 at 17:07 +1300, Jehan Pagès wrote:
 Hi,
 
 On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Roman Joost romanof...@gimp.org wrote:
  Hi,
 
  I've put together a Roadmap proposal under:
 
  http://wiki.gimp.org/index.php/Documentation:Main
 
  Any feedback is welcome. Some of the points are not to be read as: go
  ahead and implement, but rather look into it for it's feasibility.
 
  If there are no objections or comments I'd basically call the roadmap
  silently as accepted. For each point I think it'll be good to create
  bugs so we can track progress.
 
 I've not read it in details and mostly skimmed through.
 
 I got intrigued by a specific point though: moving the manual to
 github. Really? I know several (all?) of GNOME's repos have already
 been *mirrored* to github. Personally I find it acceptable if repos
 are just mirrored (that's after all one of the point of git as a
 distributed revision control), but not if it is to be considered the
 new main repository of the project. github is just another of these
 platforms led by a company, just like was Sourceforge (and now look,
 with time, all projects are fleeing it, just as we did), and like will
 be some other fashionable platform in the future. So I say, we keep
 control of the main repo. And if a github mirror had to be created,
 that would only be to profit of its network effect (why not), but it
 must be soon clear to new contributors that they must sync with the
 GNOME repo in the end, not the github one.
 
 Was that what you were proposing? If so, ok.
 
 If you really propose to move the main repo to github (as it is
 worded on the wiki), then I personally vote against.

+1 from me.

Why would you move to github? I agree with everything Jehan said.

Regards,
--Mitch


___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list


Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp Manual Roadmap proposal

2014-02-06 Thread Roman Joost
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 09:16:00AM +0100, Michael Natterer wrote:
 On Thu, 2014-02-06 at 17:07 +1300, Jehan Pagès wrote:
  Hi,
  
  On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Roman Joost romanof...@gimp.org wrote:
   Hi,
  
   I've put together a Roadmap proposal under:
  
   http://wiki.gimp.org/index.php/Documentation:Main
  
   Any feedback is welcome. Some of the points are not to be read as: go
   ahead and implement, but rather look into it for it's feasibility.
  
   If there are no objections or comments I'd basically call the roadmap
   silently as accepted. For each point I think it'll be good to create
   bugs so we can track progress.
  
  I've not read it in details and mostly skimmed through.
  
  I got intrigued by a specific point though: moving the manual to
  github. Really?
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding caused by my poor organisation of the
wiki page. This is not part of the roadmap, but is part of our list of
ideas. As such, I think it is valid to raise and think about; talk about
it's pros and cons. But that's all what it is so far - an idea asking if
it would bring any benefits.

  I know several (all?) of GNOME's repos have already
  been *mirrored* to github. Personally I find it acceptable if repos
  are just mirrored (that's after all one of the point of git as a
  distributed revision control), but not if it is to be considered the
  new main repository of the project. github is just another of these
  platforms led by a company, just like was Sourceforge (and now look,
  with time, all projects are fleeing it, just as we did), and like will
  be some other fashionable platform in the future. So I say, we keep
  control of the main repo. And if a github mirror had to be created,
  that would only be to profit of its network effect (why not), but it
  must be soon clear to new contributors that they must sync with the
  GNOME repo in the end, not the github one.
  
  Was that what you were proposing? If so, ok.
 
 +1 from me.
 
 Why would you move to github? I agree with everything Jehan said.

I've never considered it in such a detail. So well said. I couldn't
agree more.

I've moved our ideas on to a separate page to make the key points for
the next release (3.0) more readable.

Cheers for the feeback!
-- 
Roman Joost
www: http://www.romanofski.de
email: romanof...@gimp.org
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list


[Gimp-developer] Gimp Manual Roadmap proposal

2014-02-05 Thread Roman Joost
Hi,

I've put together a Roadmap proposal under:

http://wiki.gimp.org/index.php/Documentation:Main

Any feedback is welcome. Some of the points are not to be read as: go
ahead and implement, but rather look into it for it's feasibility.

If there are no objections or comments I'd basically call the roadmap
silently as accepted. For each point I think it'll be good to create
bugs so we can track progress.

Kind Regards,
-- 
Roman Joost
www: http://www.romanofski.de
email: romanof...@gimp.org
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list


Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp Manual Roadmap proposal

2014-02-05 Thread Jehan Pagès
Hi,

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Roman Joost romanof...@gimp.org wrote:
 Hi,

 I've put together a Roadmap proposal under:

 http://wiki.gimp.org/index.php/Documentation:Main

 Any feedback is welcome. Some of the points are not to be read as: go
 ahead and implement, but rather look into it for it's feasibility.

 If there are no objections or comments I'd basically call the roadmap
 silently as accepted. For each point I think it'll be good to create
 bugs so we can track progress.

I've not read it in details and mostly skimmed through.

I got intrigued by a specific point though: moving the manual to
github. Really? I know several (all?) of GNOME's repos have already
been *mirrored* to github. Personally I find it acceptable if repos
are just mirrored (that's after all one of the point of git as a
distributed revision control), but not if it is to be considered the
new main repository of the project. github is just another of these
platforms led by a company, just like was Sourceforge (and now look,
with time, all projects are fleeing it, just as we did), and like will
be some other fashionable platform in the future. So I say, we keep
control of the main repo. And if a github mirror had to be created,
that would only be to profit of its network effect (why not), but it
must be soon clear to new contributors that they must sync with the
GNOME repo in the end, not the github one.

Was that what you were proposing? If so, ok.

If you really propose to move the main repo to github (as it is
worded on the wiki), then I personally vote against.

Jehan


 Kind Regards,
 --
 Roman Joost
 www: http://www.romanofski.de
 email: romanof...@gimp.org
 ___
 gimp-developer-list mailing list
 List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
 List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
 List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list