On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 03:56:55PM +0100, Fernando Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Unix vendors as HP-UX, Solaris and AIX are dropping CDE towards GNOME), but
> GNOME optional support will be very interesting. For example:
It will be very easy to make a gnome-frontend for gimp-2.0, as it wi
Just one issue. This "Future of the GIMP" paper doesn't say anyting about
GNOME integration. I think this is an important issue. I know that GIMP wants
to be plataform independent (just now KDE/GNOME independent, because other
Unix vendors as HP-UX, Solaris and AIX are dropping CDE towar
Raphael Quinet wrote:
>
> I think that it is more important to standardize a method to build and
> install from source, because that will enable everybody to try the
> plug-ins as soon as they are released, and this will support many more
> platforms than the ones that are actively updated by a
On 13 Dec, Sven Neumann wrote:
> gnome-cvs can not do this for us (because it only has all-or-nothing
> permissions), we need to look for another CVS server. Eventually our
> employer convergence could help, I'll ask.
I can offer you a server on a decent connection as well.b
--
Servus,
On 14 Dec, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Please keep in mind that the main intention of our proposal has been
> to better distribute work between core and plug-in developers by
> seperating the source trees during development. Perhaps this scheme
> could be translated to distribution too, but it does not
Small addition to my previous message:
Basically, what we need for distributing the source code of the
plug-ins is a mechanism similar to CPAN, except that it should rely on
a tool or plug-in distributed with the Gimp and not on Perl. It could
also be extended for fetching binaries, but this is
Hi,
On 14 Dec 2000, Sven Neumann wrote:
> What's wrong with letting the distributors do their job and let them
> take care of creating binary packages? I doubt we have the possibilities
> to support all the various platforms out there. By releasing seperate
> tarballs we'd make it very esay f
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lourens Veen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > All true, but then the problem is that non-technical users have to wait
> > for someone (or their favourite distribution) to package new plugins.
> > IE, let's say I write a new plugin, put
Hi,
Lourens Veen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> All true, but then the problem is that non-technical users have to wait
> for someone (or their favourite distribution) to package new plugins.
> IE, let's say I write a new plugin, put it on plugins.gimp.org in source
> form. Then Joe User can't us
Sven Neumann wrote:
> Please keep in mind that the main intention of our proposal has been to
> better distribute work between core and plug-in developers by seperating
> the source trees during development. Perhaps this scheme could be translated
> to distribution too, but it does not have to. If
sounds good to me. we do need to also worry about the cost of
downloading from the web for european users who often have expensive
slower connections. im lucky and have a unlimited usage so could use
the convenient web idiot-proof method.
Lourens Veen wrote:
>
> Jon Winters wrote:
> >
> > We
Hi,
Jon Winters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We should keep in mind that the vast majority of Gimp users are not
> compiling from source. A shell script is not something those folks
> understand. Their reaction will be... Heh.. Where are all the plugins,
> this sucks!
Please keep in mind tha
Your last email looks good! Something for everyone!
I should have added that the "craplet" that I described could have a
"get plugins from CDROM" button that could facilitate installing plugins
from CD. You are correct... it is hard to imagine a computer without an
internet connection. ;-)
Jon Winters wrote:
>
> We should keep in mind that the vast majority of Gimp users are not
> compiling from source. A shell script is not something those folks
> understand. Their reaction will be... Heh.. Where are all the plugins,
> this sucks!
Yep. Most users won't read the README either so
We should keep in mind that the vast majority of Gimp users are not
compiling from source. A shell script is not something those folks
understand. Their reaction will be... Heh.. Where are all the plugins,
this sucks!
Then large numbers of them will post to the gimp-devel list wondering WTF
ha
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:51:42PM +0100, Lourens Veen wrote:
>1) User downloads source from gimp.org, and compiles and installs gimp
>himself
>2) User downloads and installs an RPM (or other package) from the net
>(either directly, or via an ftp install of his favourite distribution).
>3) User in
Hi again,
I've thought of 3 installation scenarios:
1) User downloads source from gimp.org, and compiles and installs gimp
himself
2) User downloads and installs an RPM (or other package) from the net
(either directly, or via an ftp install of his favourite distribution).
3) User installs gimp w
Hi,
Tino Schwarze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why would you want to reinvent the wheel? Follow Unix philosophy: Use
> tools which are already there.
>
> I propose:
> 1. let the user use the package tool she wants
> 2. make plugins relocateable (I guess, not only RPM can do that)
> 3. provide
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 02:52:56PM -0500, Adrian Likins wrote:
> > > As for the plugin distribution, I think the nicest way would be to have
> > > a plugin manager that would enable you to download plugins from the web
> > > on the fly. Something Linux distributions have too, you just connect
Someone today mentioned something about a new way to manage plugins. I
think the users would enjoy a plugin manager similar to the Helix Gnome
Updater.
Users could fire it up from time to time and be presented with a list of
plugins to update or add.
I think the Helix thing is open source. I
I was thinking something along these lines myself prior to reading this
post. I am rather fond of how the helix updater works. It is important
to remember that in many places in Europe it is still pay-by-the-minute
for net connections so it would be nice for some users not to need to
install all
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 08:26:59PM +0100, Michael Natterer wrote:
> > As for the plugin distribution, I think the nicest way would be to have
> > a plugin manager that would enable you to download plugins from the web
> > on the fly. Something Linux distributions have too, you just connect to
> >
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 05:08:03PM +0100, Lourens Veen wrote:
> I realise that it's probably too late already, but dare I say C++? Did
> anyone ever even consider this?
We don't vote here, but FWIW twelve months on kImageShop is still an
argument, some screenshots and a dormant CVS tree. I vote n
Lourens Veen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I realise that it's probably too late already, but dare I say C++? Did
> anyone ever even consider this?
We discussed C++ on GimpCon and came to the conclusion to use C :)
mainly for the following reasons:
- Linking: you need to create wrappers to make
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 05:59:56PM +0100, Fernando Herrera wrote:
> Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 04:40:54PM +0100, Michael Natterer escribió:
> >
> > o Think about a new way to handle plug-in distribution
> >
> > As more and more plug-ins go into the main gimp distribution (and a lot
> > of plug-ins a
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 05:08:03PM +0100, Lourens Veen wrote:
> I realise that it's probably too late already, but dare I say C++? Did
> anyone ever even consider this?
>
> As for the plugin distribution, I think the nicest way would be to have
> a plugin manager that would enable you to download
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2000-12-12 at 1759.56 +0100):
> > o Think about a new way to handle plug-in distribution
Install them on machines or put some kind of site to share plugins? I
hope the later, to install there are main ways, another new would be
waste, I think.
> > As more and more plug-ins g
Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 04:40:54PM +0100, Michael Natterer escribió:
>
> o Think about a new way to handle plug-in distribution
>
> As more and more plug-ins go into the main gimp distribution (and a lot
> of plug-ins are wating to be included), it becomes difficult to maintain
> them all. Core
I realise that it's probably too late already, but dare I say C++? Did
anyone ever even consider this?
As for the plugin distribution, I think the nicest way would be to have
a plugin manager that would enable you to download plugins from the web
on the fly. Something Linux distributions have too
The future of The GIMP
December 2000 by Sven Neumann & Michael Natterer
This document is meant to be a RFC (Request For Comments). Nothing described
in here is a fixed decision, everything can and should be discussed. The
reason for writing this docu
30 matches
Mail list logo
