Hi,
> > We have all the possibilities on gimp.org and we should use them.
>
> But who will do all the necessary work?
Aren't you facing that problem on every server ?
> > IMHO the whole plugin project should move back to
>
> Well :( Then we will have to find somebody who does it first.
Yep.
Hi,
> > stuff to sourceforge is a bad idea from the very beginning since it is
> > confusing to the users.
>
> another thing: why is this confusing to users? Has anybody complained
> to you? At least on this list (or the sourceforge lists) no sign
> of confusion was in sight. The web-pages make
Hi,
> I don't know. Graphics samples don't really fall under my vision of the
> plug-in site, but they can go there if they need a home, I guess. I can
> add it to the task list, and I'll give access to the web server (at
> sourceforge) to anyone who wants to implement it and demonstrates half
> So this might be a false alarm. I really don't think it looks as
> bad. Especially if you consider that such a thing as asked for since about
> a year, and we _still_ douldn't have even something remotely similar if
> there weren't that sourceforge project.
Huh? I'm sure that i
> Does anyone know where I can find prebuilt packages of GTK+1.2.7 and
GLib-1.2.7 for Redhat 6.2?
Hi,
I presume you mean RPM packages by this -- have a look at:
http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/GByName.html
rpmfind.net is always a good place to start if you're looking for any RPM
packages.
- Pier
Hi,
> if I'm informed correctly, there is some work underway for a new gimp
> website.
Who _is_ working on the new gimp.org site? I think it would be a good idea to
have several people working on seperate bits of the site (i.e. someone sorts
out the downloads, someones else the documentation, e
Hi,
> My experience is that this does not work in practice. I spent a lot
> of time last summer trying to get Grokking the GIMP onto gimp.org and
> just could not convince anyone to allow me to do it. That's why I
> created Gimp-Savvy.com.
Who did you ask then? Took me a little luck and a few
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 11:12:35 +0200
From: Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So this might be a false alarm. I really don't think it looks as
> bad. Especially if you consider that such a thing as asked for since about
> a year, and we _still_ douldn't have even something remotel
Hi,
> Alternatively, why not put all of the Gimp on Sourceforge rather than
> trying to duplicate their effort?
OK, probably I haven't enough experience with sourceforge. But could
someone please explain me what effort you are talking about that would
make it worse to use their service? Of c
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 16:08:54 +0200
From: Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Alternatively, why not put all of the Gimp on Sourceforge rather than
> trying to duplicate their effort?
OK, probably I haven't enough experience with sourceforge. But could
someone please explai
Robert L Krawitz wrote:
>
>Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 11:12:35 +0200
>From: Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> So this might be a false alarm. I really don't think it looks as
>> bad. Especially if you consider that such a thing as asked for since about
>> a year, and we _stil
Sven Neumann wrote:
> Responding to what Carey Bunks wrote:
>> My experience is that this does not work in practice. I spent a lot
>> of time last summer trying to get Grokking the GIMP onto gimp.org and
>> just could not convince anyone to allow me to do it. That's why I
>> created Gimp-Savvy
>
> He asked this very mailing list. [See attached] For just
> one link. And while only Dr. Bunks can authoritatively
> state the response he received, apparently it was zip.
It was never my point to say that the situation is perfect as is.
The only reason why I spoke up was that I wanted to s
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 11:18:57AM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote:
> > gimp.org helixcode.com gtk.org gimp-savvy.com gnome.org berkeley.edu...
>
> It's the wrong solution to a bigger problem. If you think that having all
> those different sites is a problem,
Well, actually, I'm not convinced it is
Kevin wrote:
> As long as things remain well-linked both from and to gimp.org,
which implies that someone is actively maintaining the gimp.org site. If
the few people interested and willing to do website design and website
maintainance decide to perform their skills outside the gimp.org domain
Hello,
with 1.1.22 I have discovered the following problem:
- (only one image open)
- tearof an imagemenu (say filter)
- close the image
- try to close the menu with the triangle at the upper left
- open another image
- close the tearof
same with more than one image open, but then you can chan
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 10:58:35AM +0200, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > We have all the possibilities on gimp.org and we should use them.
> > But who will do all the necessary work?
> Aren't you facing that problem on every server ?
On sourceforge, everyone can get access. With g
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 01:47:33PM +0200, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Who did you ask then? Took me a little luck and a few minutes on irc
> to get sven.gimp.org and freetype.gimp.org registered under the
It took me two emails to not get anything registered under gimp.org. Maybe
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 11:12:35AM +0200, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> It's confusing since the gimp stuff should come from one server not from
> a bunch of differently named and hard to find places.
Excuse me, plug-ins.gimp. org is difficult to find, especially when it's
linked fr
19 matches
Mail list logo
