Yosh,
> Please stop making stuff up and rewriting history to suit your own story.
> You have no real idea what happened before you appeared.
You are right that I don't have the whole story and must rely upon what
others say who were actually there.
Unlike Sven or me, you were one of the sponsore
Yosh,
> Please stop making stuff up and rewriting history to suit your own story.
> You have no real idea what happened before you appeared.
You are right that I don't have the whole story and must rely upon what
others say who were actually there.
Unlike Sven or me, you were one of the sponsore
i was talking to one of the xfree developers about changing the name to
something else so you didn't have to keep typing Xthis and Xthat. he
took off to alaska.
who is on the xfree board? i would rather ask the developers this, myself.
i have this feeling that 20 years later, they are able to
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 12:22:28AM -0700, Robin Rowe wrote:
> CinePaint won't go back to being Film Gimp and can't ever rejoin the GIMP
> project. That irreversible decision was made -- or not made according to
> Sven -- in 2000, long before I came on the scene. GIMP misplaced three
> man-years of
Hi Marc, Michael,
Calm it down a bit.
Marc A. Lehmann wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 10:33:39AM -0500, "Michael J. Hammel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> Obviously I did my homework better than you for example. No, I don't hate
> boards. I hate people who argue unfarily (like you, this is no
Hi Robin,
Robin Rowe wrote:
> Despite the code reuse in some areas, CinePaint and GIMP are actually
> diverging. CinePaint has a very different vision for the future than GIMP.
> We're pulling in features that further our mission, rejecting others as
> irrelevant, and building new designs that hav
Eric,
> So the merge is on?
A restricted code merge has been underway for months, with CinePaint
scavenging useful bits from GIMP 1.2.
The CinePaint code tree was reorganized to separate source files sensitive
to bit-depth from those that are not. Some GIMP 1.2 source files were then
swapped out
Eric,
> So the merge is on?
A restricted code merge has been underway for months, with CinePaint
scavenging useful bits from GIMP 1.2.
The CinePaint code tree was reorganized to separate source files sensitive
to bit-depth from those that are not. Some GIMP 1.2 source files were then
swapped out
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please,
This topic getting a little off topic and a little flamy. Could you
please move the discussion off the list or more on topic?
- --
Daniel Rogers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 10:33:39AM -0500, "Michael J. Hammel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 20:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > We should also consider that xfree86 currently falls aparts exactly
> > because of the board (and wrecks for quite some time already).
>
> Interest
Interesting comments Marc. Unfortunately, I couldn't disagree with you
more.
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 20:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We should also consider that xfree86 currently falls aparts exactly
> because of the board (and wrecks for quite some time already).
Interesting, if clouded, view
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann ) wrote:
| On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 01:40:12PM -0700, Daniel Rogers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
|>>with as well - how to take a loosely organized group and work with
|>>outside, commercial groups who have more str
On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 01:40:12PM -0700, Daniel Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >with as well - how to take a loosely organized group and work with
> >outside, commercial groups who have more strict rules for interaction.
> >XFree86, Apache, and others all formed boards and/or non-profits to
On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 03:09:32PM -0500, "Michael J. Hammel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> XFree86, Apache, and others all formed boards and/or non-profits to help
> deal with the situation. I believe its time the GIMP community
> seriously considered this as well.
We should also consider that x
Michael J. Hammel wrote:
The problem here is one that other open source projects have had to deal
with as well - how to take a loosely organized group and work with
outside, commercial groups who have more strict rules for interaction.
XFree86, Apache, and others all formed boards and/or non-pro
Robin Rowe wrote:
Although none of our developers are hackers, nice to hear you think highly
of some of us.
hmm, you don't have a single programmer who is working on FilmGimp
because he enjoys it? if you do, you probably have a hacker on your
team. Hacker in the original MIT definition, not
On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 14:19, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Because this decision did never happen. At least I don't remember that
> at anytime anyone ever discussed this topic. The filmgimp code slowly
> diverged from the main GIMP source code, mainly because the GIMP
> source code kept improving. Noone ev
17 matches
Mail list logo
