On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 03:30:46PM +0100, Michael Schumacher wrote:

Beyond that it's in the hands of community if they want the old scenario back and maintain some sort of a fork.

The performance of https://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp is somewhat underwhelming, so far.

It doesn't appear to be kept up, nor is it well-advertised. It'd be better to have upstream do it.

IMO we should revert back to the 2.0 look and feel, to finally fix all the horrible changes people have been complaining about for every past major release :)

Seriously, if all the changes in GIMP I was initially opposed to were reverted, the result would be something I could hardly use.

I think we can see *some* logical fallacies in your argument here.

Change is good. But listen to feedback as you make it. When there's a clear use case, see if you can cover it without serious detriment to the rest.

Matthew Miller           mattdm@mattdm.org          

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

Change is good. But listen to feedback as you make it. When there's a clear use case, see if you can cover it without serious detriment to the rest.

I just have to make this point... All feedback recived in this manner is biased. People who come to complain are the ones that come here. To have unbiased feedback you would need an unnbiased cross-selection of the users.

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

It doesn't appear to be kept up, nor is it well-advertised. It'd be better to have upstream do it.

You would have to kidnap our family members to get that, and even then you wouldn't be sure.

Change is good. But listen to feedback as you make it. When there's a clear use case, see if you can cover it without serious detriment to the rest.

We've been doing exactly that for the past, ugh, 17 years now?

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:43:32PM +0200, Alexia Death wrote:

Change is good. But listen to feedback as you make it. When there's a clear use case, see if you can cover it without serious detriment to the rest.

I just have to make this point... All feedback recived in this manner is biased. People who come to complain are the ones that come here. To have unbiased feedback you would need an unnbiased cross-selection of the users.

Sure. You can't use it as a survey. But you can use it to judge engagement. Users who care enough to come and "complain" are not just unhappy haters -- they're users who care a lot. In the case of creating a bugzilla account or signing up for a mailing list, they care enough to go through some hoops in order to be heard.

Matthew Miller           mattdm@mattdm.org          

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

Sure. You can't use it as a survey. But you can use it to judge engagement. Users who care enough to come and "complain" are not just unhappy haters -- they're users who care a lot. In the case of creating a bugzilla account or signing up for a mailing list, they care enough to go through some hoops in order to be heard.

I'm afraid you are missing an important concept.

It's one thing to listen to opinions and take them into consideration. It's a whole different thing to agree with them and take action accordingly. From what I read in your mails I draw the conclusion that you don't understand this difference.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org