Forgot to reply-all...

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Chris Mohler
Date: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop “compatibility” mode To: Christopher Curtis

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Christopher Curtis wrote:

I'm actually Ok with this. But we have to agree what we mean by "peer applications" - I'd say gimp and inkscape are, for example, and not gimp and photoshop.

So your argument is that on the "Software Spectrum" GIMP is not a graphics application but is first a GNOME application.  For the people who want, you know, to create GNOME.  It just happens to create GNOME using graphics.

I think the argument is GIMP and Inkscape are peers, while GIMP and Photoshop are not.  Makes sense to me - I hop between the two quite often.

That's sarcasm of course - you say that primary platform trumps application domain, and GIMP is GNOME because that's where it's hosted; a rather myopic and user-hostile view, IMHO.  Most people don't care one whit about GNOME or where GIMP is hosted.  They want software that is better than what they currently have, fits the way they work, and is relatively familiar ... which is going to lead down an ugly road.

Hosting is another straw man, and I believe there are people out there who are fine with the software they have, people whose workflow is constantly evolving and people who try new things.  So in other words that blanket statement cannot possibly be true ;)

So let me ask you this instead:  Are you going to oppose a patch that changes the GIMP shortcut for FG/BG fill to match PhotoShop's on the basis that Backspace does something completely different in GEdit?  Or on the basis that GIMP is not a PS clone?  Or some other reason?  Or would you have no opposition at all?

Personally I would oppose that patch (I'm not a dev).  Why mess with people who have been using GIMP for years just to mimic some other application?  There's nothing stopping you from defining your own shortcuts.

Chris