Go fork it if you want it so bad instead of complaining to people who most probably aren't even being paid.
Ask the KDE guys how that works. Hint: despite the license the GIMP crew will happily throw a hissy fit at any fork of GIMP.
Ask the KDE guys how that works. Hint: despite the license the GIMP crew will happily throw a hissy fit at any fork of GIMP.
We'd _love_ people to work on the upstream project, but forking GIMP and truly making it your own is perfectly fine.
We actually got a few useful ideas from GIMP-Painter. So who's to lose?
So the fork basically violated GIMP's license, right? I think it's very far fetched to conclude "GIMP crew will happily throw a hissy fit at any fork" from that!
1. Pick a story from 20+ years ago.
2. Pretend you are talking about the same people (they aren't).
3. Pretend they never changed their opinion about anything (they did).
4. Post a comment that suggests nothing changed since 1998 (it has).
My goodness, some people on the interwebz...
None of which really compete, but yeah, literally hundreds. Just one big one though, GIMP Painter.
- One is a regular GIMP contributor.
- One couldn't wait another day for a macOS build of version 2.10.12.
- One patched file association on Windows and submitted his patch to the upstream project.
- Some of the others worked on their pet peeves, and some of them discussed it on the upstream bug tracker.
You might want revisiting your definition of a fork :)
*Ah, what the fork! I just realized you're a GIMPer. You think that thing I said about the 1998 drama is what inferiorhuman was referencing?