Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP-painter-2.8: Current development status (20121202)

[Jehan Pagès <jehan marmottard gmail com>]

Hi,

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 11:56 PM, ceas <forums gimpusers com> wrote:

Jehan
we used to have serveral time of dicusstion about some kind of collaboration
such as gimp foundation (some kind as blender foundation) rejected by the
maintainer.

I have no idea whether making a foundation is good or not, but... what does it have anything to do with the rest?
Having a foundation does not make suddenly collaboration easy. And on the other hand, not having one does not make it hard by definition.
 

in my view, the the porblem is the kind of development of gimp right
now is not encourage the new type trying for some enthusiastic new income
developers. they highten the bar but give a hand.

I don't see at all why you would say this. In the thread you linked me earlier for instance,  the maintainer (Michael Natterer) is the one who does completely encourage the author to go on:

* he asks the ones with negative comments to stop discouraging the author "I don't know who that "GIMP team" is, but my vision is that we encourage new development like this, and not put an end to it with mails such as yours."

* he encourages the author to contribute: "Sigtech: I *strongly* encourage you to please go on, and if you could port it to goat-invasion that would be great, it's not that different from master."

* he proposes him to come discuss it on IRC: "I haven't looked at the code yet, would you mind to come to #gimp on irc.gimp.org to talk about the implementation?"

and so on. That's not because others may have been negative from the start that it means the process is broken (or else you take a random guy who came once in a restaurant and yell and you say that this restaurant is usually very noisy).
Note that I am not trying to defend anyone (and I certainly don't know Michael Natterer except for minor 2-line discussions a few times on IRC, and honestly I don't care as long as collaboration is good). For me there is no such thing as a "team", a "community" in Free Software. There are only individuals who try to work together.

Then obviously it does not mean that any contribution can be accepted right away, in particular in this case where the author obviously propose some deep changes (apparently wanting to replace a core library by another one written in C++ if I understand. That's not something to take lightly!). Also what is asked of him is much normal: working on master branch, following the decisions that have been done previously (porting to GEGL, etc.), and such. If you don't do this, well the program is doomed and development go completely berserk. When you participate on a project, you can't take over everyone, *even when you think you know better*.
I have worked with people doing this in companies and that leads only to bad things.

I also have several patches waiting on the Bugzilla, and many other lined up for ulterior proposition. But I take on myself. I also have my private 2.8 branch where I port my new features (that I worked on and patched for git master first!) so that I can provide them to the artist I work with immediately. But as my goal is not to maintain indefinitely an alternate branch, I conform to upstream rules and listen to advices, which may mean change the way a proposed feature is working or even dropping part of it if it is poor.

In any case, collaboration is a 2-way thing. I don't know exactly how it ended and why Sigetch apparently decided not to participate. That's just too bad to duplicate efforts this way.

 

 

in this case, some even didn't make a judgement before understand what sigetch
want to do.
i am not intend saying someone' bad, but i think the world will be more
beautifull if we use this
"hey , this sound like interesting, but we have some problem if use your method

directioin, let 's find a way to makethe ideal works."

I read that's the way Michael did it, as I said.
Why antagonize when we could work it out?

Jehan

rather than
" hey,  we wont use it, since the painting is never an objective,  you can folk
it but we wont merge it."

--
ceas (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list gnome org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list