Free and Open Source Software

20521 readers

49 users here now

If it's free and open source and it's also software, it can be discussed here. Subcommunity of Technology.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Gaywallet@beehaw.org

alyaza@beehaw.org

A GIMP Guide, but from a Photoshop User (www.youtube.com)

submitted 1 week ago by otters_raft@lemmy.ca to c/foss@beehaw.org

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This should be helpful for people that learned Photoshop in the past (for work or in school). From what I understand, a lot of the friction with GIMP is the workflow differences, and potentially unintuitive UI/UX choices.

tldr: recovering Adobe Photoshop user shows you features in the very free and very open source gnu image manipulation program :D

my relevant GIMP config files: https://github.com/BreadOnPenguins/dots/tree/master/.config/GIMP/3.0

GIMP documentation: https://www.gimp.org/docs/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SweetCitrusBuzz@beehaw.org 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

“let’s fork it for the sole purpose of rebranding”

That wasn't the only thing they did, the legitimately wanted to fix a lot of problems with the GNU Imp too.

so I absolutely understand why people would be against this

Nobody deserves harassment and abuse for changing the name of something.

[–] Devjavu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You got the name of the fork? I'd be interested.

[–] SweetCitrusBuzz@beehaw.org 1 points 1 week ago

Glimpse

[–] Devjavu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If they did change stuff technically whcih wouldn't be adressed otherwise, then I don't see a reason. Sounds like bad actors.

I did not even talk about harassment, that was you. But I agree, you shouldn't harass people for this. Does not change that I am against hate-forks, which this did sound like at first.

[–] SweetCitrusBuzz@beehaw.org 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If they did change stuff technically whcih wouldn’t be adressed otherwise, then I don’t see a reason. Sounds like bad actors.

I don't understand what you mean here, could you please explain again?

[–] Devjavu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Sorry, badly phrased. If they actually changed stuff technically in their fork, then I see no reason why one would criticize that. That is literally what a fork is for.

[–] SweetCitrusBuzz@beehaw.org 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yes, they did actually change things technically. Thanks for clarifying 🙂

[–] Devjavu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I don't actually see that though, taken a look at their repo, they only seemed to remove branding and easter eggs to distance themselves from the GIMP project. They even went so far as to linger on versions and not merge features from GIMP, so they were actually behind. That would be what I mean by hate fork. Nothing technically good has been done with the repo.

Edit: I think they wanted to change the UI abit too for better accessibility, which would actually be a technical change for once, but other than that I don't see anything contributed to better software.

[–] SweetCitrusBuzz@beehaw.org 2 points 1 week ago

To be fair, they were not given enough time before the abuse and harassment happened.

If that didn't happen it is likely they would have changed and improved more.