RSS/Atom feed Twitter
Site is read-only, email is disabled

(no subject)

This discussion is connected to the gimp-developer-list.gnome.org mailing list which is provided by the GIMP developers and not related to gimpusers.com.

This is a read-only list on gimpusers.com so this discussion thread is read-only, too.

2 of 2 messages available
Toggle history

Please log in to manage your subscriptions.

(no subject) saulgoode@brickfilms.com 19 Apr 15:42
  (no subject) Alexander Rabtchevich 19 Apr 16:08
saulgoode@brickfilms.com
2006-04-19 15:42:35 UTC (over 18 years ago)

(no subject)

Now I see that a little link could have saved me time (and disk space ;-)) and maybe brought to GIMP some more beta testers. I can't understand the rationale behind this decision to hide the binaries.

I mean to cast no aspersion on Paolo here, I imagine he is correct that a few beta-testers are "put off" by the effort of compiling from source and that they might provide valuable feedback. Nonetheless, adding "some more beta testers" is not always a good thing. I think it does not take much inductive reasoning to foresee that hundreds of Windows users who don't know what a DLL is would soon inundate the dozen or so developers available who have to address problem reports. Many of these new beta-testers would have merely downloaded the "latest version" and have no idea what beta-testing entails (I have seen this happen in the past).

If someone, like Paolo, wishes to ease the burden of compiling development versions from source and still be able to contribute then I would suggest that he get together with some like-minded people, share a pre-compiled binary, and discuss amongst themselves the problems they encounter. Only one amongst the group would have to do the compiling and the group could work together to not only find problems but investigate solutions. In addition, the veteran members of the group could tutor the neophytes about the GIMP's development and create some truly worthwhile "beta-testers".

$0.02

Alexander Rabtchevich
2006-04-19 16:08:31 UTC (over 18 years ago)

(no subject)

Your solution is too much complicated. Current situation with "hidden" binaries is much more acceptable from my POV. As the practice shows, the persons who want to obtain bleeding edge version ask for it at the yahoo win Gimp users group. They obtain the answer - some kind of "look through the links at the site". And they find the executable they want. And in you case they would have to compile Gimp themselves or search for the person who would kindly do it for them.

P.S. There is still no 2.3.8 compiled at the usual palace ;)

If someone, like Paolo, wishes to ease the burden of compiling development versions from source and still be able to contribute then I would suggest that he get together with some like-minded people, share a pre-compiled binary, and discuss amongst themselves the problems they encounter.