The team is targeting May 2024, but it's going to be tough, and here is why
  • Bloody Harry@feddit.de
    7·
    1 year ago

    wait, what? I’ve had a GIMP 2.x for at least 15 years now. they can’t just… increase the number?? it’s part of the program’s name now

        • aard@kyu.de
          2·
          1 year ago

          I guess we can give GIMP a pass to be a bit slower in migrating to new versions of the _G_IMP _T_ool_K_it than others…

          • winety@communick.news
            2·
            1 year ago

            The GTK3 port has been in the making for a very long time. Long before anyone even mentioned GTK4. Porting an application to a different GUI toolkit is a lot of work.

            • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
              0·
              1 year ago

              And it shouldn’t be. Sure, there are some new features you may want to take advantage of, but it’s lamentable that GTK doesn’t try harder to maintain backwards compatability.

              You know who does major version changes well? Go. Excellent backwards compatible over a decade of very active development, and when there are recommended or required changes, the compiler provides tooling to update source code to the new API.

              • Aatube@kbin.social
                2·
                1 year ago

                According to the GTK team, trying to maintain backwards compatibility dragged the whole project down. I agree that a basics’ automatic porting tool would’ve been nice.

              • TheOPtimal@lemmy.blahaj.zoneქართული
                1·
                1 year ago

                GTK2->GTK3 was a major leap. For something like a GUI toolkit, changes and advancements are inevitable. A GTK4 port would be much less difficult, as the developer-facing changes are an order of magnitude smaller.

  • Tyler K. Nothing@startrek.websiteEnglish
    3·
    1 year ago

    I don’t need any of the advanced tools, I just want a cleaner interface for the tools that already exist. The only thing I’m able to do is make header pics for my posts. The 2.x UI is really, really old now. The time for a refresh was a few years back, but I do understand the limitations of a small team. Like others have said, I’ll likely run both and migrate to 3.x when it’s stable. Though, I do like the idea of non-destructive editing :)

  • LeFantome@programming.dev
    1·
    1 year ago

    I realize that the major point of GIMP 3 is the port to GTK3. That said, I feel like colour spaces are what people have been waiting for and probably the most significant deficiency that keeps GIMP from being treated as a professional tool.

    If they are really this close, why not set the GIMP 3 release date for when colour management is ready?

    Non-destructive editing will be huge as well. GIMP 3 is really going to be a crazy leap forward. It is going to be amazing to finally get access to all this work that has been walled off for decades.

    The bug situation sounds terrible. Honestly though, they should just get 3 out and then make bug fixing the number one job until it gets into better shape.

    Not only is it a small team but right now there are basically two different projects ( 2 and 3 ). With only one code base, perhaps the pace of progress can improve.

    Hopefully the move to GTK4 is easier.

    • Vincent@kbin.social
      3·
      1 year ago

      So you’re saying: don’t release the GTK 3 port until colour spaces are also complete? Why not give people what’s ready, and then when colour spaces are ready, cut another release? No need to make people wait who don’t need colour spaces.

      (Additionally, it’s easier to verify that bugs reported before the release of colour spaces are more likely to be related to the GTK3 port.)