Von: Leon Brooks

This may seem like an oxymoron, given GIMP's heavy defacto relationship with GNOME-flavoured GTK, but is there any GIMP equivalent to OpenOffice's KDE integration (http://kde.openoffice.org/)?

If KDE/Qt and GNOME/GTK+ both adhere to the freedesktop.org standards, you won't have to change anything to achieve integration.

Michael

On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 09:05:30AM +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:

This may seem like an oxymoron, given GIMP's heavy defacto relationship with GNOME-flavoured GTK, but is there any GIMP equivalent to OpenOffice's KDE integration (http://kde.openoffice.org/)?

do you know what "GTK" stands for?

carol

Hi,

Leon Brooks writes:

This may seem like an oxymoron, given GIMP's heavy defacto relationship with GNOME-flavoured GTK, but is there any GIMP equivalent to OpenOffice's KDE integration (http://kde.openoffice.org/)?

GIMP is not a GNOME application, it uses GTK+, the GIMP toolkit. This is by chance the same toolkit that GNOME uses, so integration with GNOME is easier to achieve. That doesn't mean though that we wouldn't try to make GIMP work well on KDE. GIMP supports most of the cross-platform specs that the KDE and GNOME people are developing to make this happen. What is missing to achieve better KDE integration is someone who tests GIMP on KDE, gives feedback and points out what's working and where there are problems.

I am guessing that a "zero overhead" (at least for GTK, I'd envision this as a 1:1 mapping using #defines) toolkit mapping layer at the source-code level would make "ports" for Qt/KDE, Carbon, wxWidgets or whatever considerably easier. Then there'd be only alternative shims to maintain, not a whole raft of debris integrated with The GIMP proper, and toolkit bugs would all be located in very few files.

I very much doubt that such a layer could be created.

Sven

Hi,

Boudewijn Rempt writes:

Basically, there are no problems at all. Not a single one. The incompatibility betweeen Gnome and KDE applications is much exaggerated. Sure, KDE apps take a little longer to startup on Gnome, and vice versa, but, well, you cannot expect each desktop to preload each others configurations. Everything works just fine and dandy.

Good to hear. But does it really all work well? What aboout DND, the clipboard? Do images opened in GIMP show up in the KDE recent documents list? Does Konqueror show the thumbnails we created? Can I drag a layer out of the development version of GIMP and drop it into KOffice? Does Klipper support the Clipboard Management Specification?

Sven

On Friday 17 June 2005 18:11, Sven Neumann wrote:

Hi,

GIMP is not a GNOME application, it uses GTK+, the GIMP toolkit. This is by chance the same toolkit that GNOME uses, so integration with GNOME is easier to achieve. That doesn't mean though that we wouldn't try to make GIMP work well on KDE. GIMP supports most of the cross-platform specs that the KDE and GNOME people are developing to make this happen. What is missing to achieve better KDE integration is someone who tests GIMP on KDE, gives feedback and points out what's working and where there are problems.

I actually run the GIMP on KDE, and it works just fine. Minor bug related to KDE integration are reported form time to time to bugzilla, and that is all there is that doesn't work.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Leon Brooks wrote:

Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:05:30 +0800 From: Leon Brooks
To: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu Subject: [Gimp-developer] FAQ (-: sooner or later :-) KDEification of GIMP

This may seem like an oxymoron, given GIMP's heavy defacto relationship with GNOME-flavoured GTK, but is there any GIMP equivalent to OpenOffice's KDE integration (http://kde.openoffice.org/)?

The closest I could find was a vague reference to a pre-2.0 KDEified version of The GIMP, apparently called "KIMP"...

http://dot.kde.org/1096230607/1096270511/

...and this discussion, which is obviously approaching the issue from the KDE end and not the GIMP end of things (IMESHO, starting from the wrong end):

http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=92756018422117&w=2

I am guessing that a "zero overhead" (at least for GTK, I'd envision this as a 1:1 mapping using #defines) toolkit mapping layer at the source-code level would make "ports" for Qt/KDE, Carbon, wxWidgets or whatever considerably easier. Then there'd be only alternative shims to maintain, not a whole raft of debris integrated with The GIMP proper, and toolkit bugs would all be located in very few files.

I am optimistic project like metatheme will help improve consistency between Gtk and KDE applications and help leave the choice of toolkits to the developers. If you are interested in looking into it futher here is their website:

http://metatheme.advel.cz/

Sincerely

Alan Horkan

Inkscape http://inkscape.org Abiword http://www.abisource.com
Dia http://gnome.org/projects/dia/
Open Clip Art http://OpenClipArt.org

Alan's Diary http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/

On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 10:13:26PM +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:

On Friday 17 June 2005 22:25, Carol Spears wrote:

On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 09:05:30AM +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:

This may seem like an oxymoron, given GIMP's heavy defacto relationship with GNOME-flavoured GTK, but is there any GIMP equivalent to OpenOffice's KDE integration (http://kde.openoffice.org/)?

do you know what "GTK" stands for?

Yes.

Hopefully one day GEGL will also be useful enough used by lots of GNOME apps as if it were a part of GNOME. I regularly use GTK apps (yes, including The GIMP) on MS-Windows.

the point is, GNOME is GIMP-flavored.

thanks, carol

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Sven Neumann wrote:

Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:11:25 +0200 From: Sven Neumann
To: Leon Brooks
Cc: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] FAQ (-: sooner or later :-) KDEification of GIMP

Hi,

Leon Brooks writes:

This may seem like an oxymoron, given GIMP's heavy defacto relationship with GNOME-flavoured GTK, but is there any GIMP equivalent to OpenOffice's KDE integration (http://kde.openoffice.org/)?

GIMP is not a GNOME application,

This point has been made before and I hope Sven is willing to clarify this point a little more as I do not entirely understand his purpose in saying it or putting it exactly that way.

People have different ideas of what it means to be a Gnome application. For a long time the prevailing view has been a Gnome application is an application which uses Gnome libraries and applications that are part of the Core Gnome desktop. In this sense the GIMP is not a Gnome application as it does not require libraries outside of GTK.

it uses GTK+, the GIMP toolkit. This is by chance the same toolkit that GNOME uses, so integration with GNOME is easier to achieve. That doesn't mean though that we wouldn't try to make GIMP work well on KDE.

Most mature developers recognise the benefits of working closely with KDE, following standards from Freedesktop.org and making applications integrate better. A desire to work well with both Gnome and KDE is no certainly barrier to an application becoming a Gnome application.

GIMP supports most of the cross-platform specs that the KDE and GNOME people are developing to make this happen. What is missing to achieve better KDE integration is someone who tests GIMP on KDE, gives feedback and points out what's working and where there are problems.

There is the strict sense of what it means to be a Gnome application which I described above and is what I believe Sven means and then there is the broaders sense of Gnome applications I will now try and describe.

Some people carelessly refer to all GTK applications as Gnome applications, acronyms dont slip off the tongue quite as easily as words do but this really is not accurate or helpful. (Acrobat Reader 7 and Realplayer 10 are Gtk applications but about as far away from Gnome as you can get.)

Increasingly there are many Gnome applications which no longer require any Gnome specific libraries and even the concept of Gnome libraries has changed with more and more work being done to improve Gtk instead of rebuilding uncessary layers on top of it. The older technical distinction is not as obvious or as clear anymore and many applications optionally use gnome libraries (compile time options) and can be quite different depending on what you choose.

Gnome has a wider community beyond the core desktop applications and there are other vaguely defined areas such as Gnome Office, Fifth Toe, and others which are sometimes considered to be Gnome based on developers showing an interest and being willing to consider themselves as part of Gnome in the much wider sense. The GIMP is sometimes described as being part of the Fifth Toe, part of the wider community and well integrated with Gnome.

Following the Gnome Human Interface Guidelines is something by itself which many people consider enough for any application to consider itself a Gnome application.

Some people think applications which use Gnome CVS, and Gnome Bugzilla, the Gnome Translation Project and maybe evne the Gnome Help browser to be a part of Gnome. If a developer has asked for their journal to be included on Planet Gnome one might be forgiven for getting they impression they considered themselves part of the wider Gnome community.

If the GIMP developers decided tomorrow to start saying the GIMP was a Gnome application without chaning anything else I sincerely doubt any Gnome supports would disagree and in fact I think many would welcome the gesture.

Making a firm commitment to supporting the needs of KDE users and make promises not to require Gnome libraries certainly does not mean the GIMP needs to publically distance itself from Gnome. I firmly support efforts for better interoperability and work to keep the GIMP clean and portable.

Perhaps Sven can clarify, I hope when he said "GIMP is not a GNOME application" he was describing it from a strict technical point of view and did not mean to distance the GIMP from the wider Gnome community which unfortunately was the impression I got in the past and one I think others might have also mistakenly gotten too.

Sincerely

Alan Horkan http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/

On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 06:25:54PM +0100, Alan Horkan wrote:

Following the Gnome Human Interface Guidelines is something by itself which many people consider enough for any application to consider itself a Gnome application.

in my opinion, this is the best point you have made here.

Some people think applications which use Gnome CVS, and Gnome Bugzilla, the Gnome Translation Project and maybe evne the Gnome Help browser to be a part of Gnome. If a developer has asked for their journal to be included on Planet Gnome one might be forgiven for getting they impression they considered themselves part of the wider Gnome community.

it is a trade off. when i was using gimp and trying to figure out how all of this software works, i really tried to install gnome. my brother did not mind having gimp on his computer (he also did not have much space for it there) since it more than replaced xv. however, he did not want gnome installed there since it did nothing that twm or fvwm wasn't already doing.

when i got my own computer which was about double my brothers computer (he had 33M and i had 70M hard drive and similar doubling of not much ram and other interesting numbers like this) i was quite unimpressed with the mountains of software that gnome required.

the question has always been for me, who benefits more from the relationship? gimp has been authored fairly carefully to only need libraries that it actually needs. gnome was not written this way. gimp gets cvs and bugzilla from gnome, gnome gets the benefit of gimp's popularity and the multitude of users testing the toolkit. i dont think any other application uses the gimp tool kit more than gimp does. simply due to the fact that gimp actually does more.

If the GIMP developers decided tomorrow to start saying the GIMP was a Gnome application without chaning anything else I sincerely doubt any Gnome supports would disagree and in fact I think many would welcome the gesture.

off and on, i try to install gedit to see if i can change from NEdit to something that shares the gimp tool kit with gimp. i have not tried recently, however the last time i did i had to install so many extra packages. it is a simple text editor, forchrissakes.

given this example, and the things that i like about gimp (not requiring extra software until it needs it) i cannot say that the same would be true if reversed. if GNOME started to call itself a GIMP application tomorrow, i sincerely doubt that GIMP developers would welcome the gesture. clean up gedit and i would consider to welcome the idea ....

Making a firm commitment to supporting the needs of KDE users and make promises not to require Gnome libraries certainly does not mean the GIMP needs to publically distance itself from Gnome. I firmly support efforts for better interoperability and work to keep the GIMP clean and portable.

working with freedesktop.org did this for both GNOME and KDE.

i would like to know the reason that KDE breaks so often at the freedesktop level? i am so confused by this quality KDE has and open to any logical explanation.

carol

On 6/18/05, Alan Horkan wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Sven Neumann wrote:

Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:11:25 +0200 From: Sven Neumann
To: Leon Brooks
Cc: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] FAQ (-: sooner or later :-) KDEification of GIMP

Hi,

Leon Brooks writes:

This may seem like an oxymoron, given GIMP's heavy defacto relationship with GNOME-flavoured GTK, but is there any GIMP equivalent to OpenOffice's KDE integration (http://kde.openoffice.org/ )?

GIMP is not a GNOME application,

This point has been made before and I hope Sven is willing to clarify this point a little more as I do not entirely understand his purpose in saying it or putting it exactly that way.

Certainly there are as many definitions of what it means to be gnome as there are gnome developers. But if you've seen the much talked-about "10x10" video, I'd say to use the terminology there, gimp "is GNOME", but is not "in GNOME". If you haven't seen that video, the distinction probably doesn't mean a thing for you, of course. :)

Rockwalrus