3 ms·

GIMP is free software, so maybe they can just fork it and rename it :P

leolambda 7y ago
The GIMP project has purposely made it difficult to rename; patches making it easier to rename have been categorically rejected by the maintainers. So, yes, people are currently talking about forking it.
- siphon22 7y ago
  They should do that, instead of destroying over 20 years of work to make their name. Let's see in the end which program will prosper.
  - leolambda 7y ago
    > destroying over 20 years of work to make their name. Oh right. I forgot filing an issue presenting a calm and reasoned argument for changing one string of text to another was the same as "destroying" a project.
    - siphon22 7y ago
      Snark is not acceptable on HN. And yes, making an established project change their name is destroying everything they had done for it under that name. They will have to start over from scratch and it will take years to reach the same level of name recognition.
      - leolambda 7y ago
        Again: this was addressed in the issue discussion, making me think you didn't read it. I'm not going to argue with you about this if you refuse to even read the document you're arguing against.
      - xrd 7y ago
        You are really going to lecture on snark after your last comment?
        siphon22 7y ago
        You think >"Let's see in the end which program will prosper." is snark? I guess snark is also in the eye of the beholder.
        xrd 7y ago
        I didn't check the timestamps of all your comments so maybe it isn't your last comment. I'll let others here read through your comments (as I definitely did) and see if you made a snarky comment before lecturing others on snark. It might not be fair: snark is in the eye of the beholder, right? Oops, now I'm being snarky.
GiorgioG 7y ago
Yep they could, but then they'd have to figure out how the software is built, rather than just shitting on the name. I'm just going to leave this right here: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake
- leolambda 7y ago
  As someone who participated in this issue, I want to let you know that we chose to engage the current maintainers before forking because that's the nice, respectful thing to do. I, personally, find it extremely aggravating when people fork projects over minor decisions like this. It leads to a huge amount of wasted effort on both sides. As it is, we're likely to either fork the project (which is underway at the moment), or build a GIMP keybinding compatibility layer for Krita; the second is less preferable because it would require quite a lot of hacking to make the more advanced features work, and would almost certainly not reach 100% parity. As you note, either one will be a good deal of effort; another reason we wanted to at least ask the maintainers if they would be willing to accept a patch with the name change, instead. Now what was your point, other than to insult some people whose argument you almost certainly didn't read?
  - GiorgioG 7y ago
    I actually did read the thread thank you very much. My point is people want to bitch about a trivial thing (yes it is my opinion that this is a trivial matter.) How much effort and time are you willing to spend on such a minor thing as a 4 character string? I predict someone will fork it, and in a year's time it'll be abandoned and not kept up to date because they'll simply move onto the next trivial matter which offends you folks. Frankly, few will use your fork anyway because it provides zero value vs the established name/brand.
    - leolambda 7y ago
      So, you read the issue. What is it you fail to grasp about the conversation "I think, rather than buying Photoshop, you should use this software." "We can't use software with a name like that." That's a conversation I've had, in real life, with a professor and a professional photographer. Literally, the only thing holding them back was the name. How is that zero value?!

The GIMP project has purposely made it difficult to rename; patches making it easier to rename have been categorically rejected by the maintainers. So, yes, people are currently talking about forking it.

siphon22 7y ago
They should do that, instead of destroying over 20 years of work to make their name. Let's see in the end which program will prosper.
- leolambda 7y ago
  > destroying over 20 years of work to make their name. Oh right. I forgot filing an issue presenting a calm and reasoned argument for changing one string of text to another was the same as "destroying" a project.
  - siphon22 7y ago
    Snark is not acceptable on HN. And yes, making an established project change their name is destroying everything they had done for it under that name. They will have to start over from scratch and it will take years to reach the same level of name recognition.
    - leolambda 7y ago
      Again: this was addressed in the issue discussion, making me think you didn't read it. I'm not going to argue with you about this if you refuse to even read the document you're arguing against.
    - xrd 7y ago
      You are really going to lecture on snark after your last comment?
      - siphon22 7y ago
        You think >"Let's see in the end which program will prosper." is snark? I guess snark is also in the eye of the beholder.
        xrd 7y ago
        I didn't check the timestamps of all your comments so maybe it isn't your last comment. I'll let others here read through your comments (as I definitely did) and see if you made a snarky comment before lecturing others on snark. It might not be fair: snark is in the eye of the beholder, right? Oops, now I'm being snarky.

GiorgioG 7y ago

Yep they could, but then they'd have to figure out how the software is built, rather than just shitting on the name. I'm just going to leave this right here: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake

leolambda 7y ago
As someone who participated in this issue, I want to let you know that we chose to engage the current maintainers before forking because that's the nice, respectful thing to do. I, personally, find it extremely aggravating when people fork projects over minor decisions like this. It leads to a huge amount of wasted effort on both sides. As it is, we're likely to either fork the project (which is underway at the moment), or build a GIMP keybinding compatibility layer for Krita; the second is less preferable because it would require quite a lot of hacking to make the more advanced features work, and would almost certainly not reach 100% parity. As you note, either one will be a good deal of effort; another reason we wanted to at least ask the maintainers if they would be willing to accept a patch with the name change, instead. Now what was your point, other than to insult some people whose argument you almost certainly didn't read?
- GiorgioG 7y ago
  I actually did read the thread thank you very much. My point is people want to bitch about a trivial thing (yes it is my opinion that this is a trivial matter.) How much effort and time are you willing to spend on such a minor thing as a 4 character string? I predict someone will fork it, and in a year's time it'll be abandoned and not kept up to date because they'll simply move onto the next trivial matter which offends you folks. Frankly, few will use your fork anyway because it provides zero value vs the established name/brand.
  - leolambda 7y ago
    So, you read the issue. What is it you fail to grasp about the conversation "I think, rather than buying Photoshop, you should use this software." "We can't use software with a name like that." That's a conversation I've had, in real life, with a professor and a professional photographer. Literally, the only thing holding them back was the name. How is that zero value?!