can we stop this thread?
there is a good chance that i am responsible for the bad blood between
filmgimp and gimp. i was writing to Robin and i might have said
something rude.
as far as how free software works, i remember when Sven started to take
over. i read the developer mail and kept thin
Hi,
David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perhaps, a year ago, if someone had proposed re-merging the extra
> colordepth code from cinepaint into the gimp, with the idea that
> it would eventually be replaced by gegl post-2.2, it might have
> happened for 2.0. However, that didn't happen, and
Hi,
I know I should stop actually this thread but since Robin didn't get
the point again, I will comment to some of the more personal attacks
included in his former reply. Perhaps this can help to get rid of some
misunderstandings.
"Robin Rowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Your name isn't liste
Eric Pierce wrote:
> >> Robin, there is really no point in being personally offended here.
> >
> > Sven, no need to apologize. I said I wasn't offended.
>
> So the merge is on?
Perhaps, a year ago, if someone had proposed re-merging the extra
colordepth code from cinepaint into the gimp, with the
>> Robin, there is really no point in being personally offended here.
>
> Sven, no need to apologize. I said I wasn't offended.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Robin
So the merge is on?
> ---
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hollywood, California
> ww
> Robin, there is really no point in being personally offended here.
Sven, no need to apologize. I said I wasn't offended.
Cheers,
Robin
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hollywood, California
www.CinePaint.org Free motion picture a
t: Re: [Gimp-user] CinePaint and Film Gimp
Hi,
> For you to suggest today that the problem was me not communicating
> enough shows real cheek. The person out of the loop is you. You have
> admitted you have no clue what happened to Film Gimp in 2000 when it
> was killed or in
Hi,
> For you to suggest today that the problem was me not communicating enough
> shows real cheek. The person out of the loop is you. You have admitted you
> have no clue what happened to Film Gimp in 2000 when it was killed or in
> 2002 when it was resurrected, but that doesn't stop you from pub
This one time, at band camp, "Robin Rowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not discussed? Are you kidding?
I guess you could argue this and take up alot of time/bandwidth or ...
you could discuss it now
Kind regards
Kevin
--
__
(_ \
Sven,
> 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 ever brought up the question if the
> code s
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, "Robin" == Robin Rowe wrote:
Robin> Although none of our developers are hackers
Perhaps therein lies the problem? "...hackers..." is a good thing. See:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=hacker%20definition
Also the Hacker Manager FAQ is a good
Hi,
"Robin Rowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What bothered you and other GIMP developers so much about Film Gimp
> that in 2000 you unexpectedly discarded three man-years of your own
> work funded at substantial expense by the motion picture industry?
>
> In 1998 Film Gimp was an official devel
Title: RE: [Gimp-user] CinePaint and Film Gimp
What turned be off about CinePaint was how unstable it was. Maybe this is just a factor in the windows version. But I have never had any problems with stability win Gimp under Linux at least.
Timothy
-Original
Sven,
> All I can say is that this application (now called cine-paint) is
> based on film-gimp which was forked from GIMP around version
> 1.0. GIMP-1.0 is a piece of code from the stone age.
CinePaint. It branched from GIMP 1.0.4 in 1998.
> In my opinion
> it is a shame that some good hackers a
14 matches
Mail list logo
