[Skencil-users] Fwd: Join forces for skencil1/sK1?

[Bernhard Reiter]

Hi Igor,

sorry that it took a bit to respond, actually I wanted to get Bernhard H.
to comment, but he first wants to look at the code, in this respect
he is a lot more a code then I am. 

But anyway, here is my braindump:

On Tuesday 22 May 2007 10:40, Igor Novikov wrote:
> I had already put on some of the questions.
>
> > What name to use, and what strategy to pursue regarding
> > the now available three esisting ends skencil 0.6, sk1, skencil 0.7.
> > Then we need to find the best infrastructure for it.
>
> My suggestion is using "sK1" name for latest branch, because:
> 1. This code is highly differ from 0.6/0.7 versions

I believe this is tightly coupled with the question of how many
branched we keep alive. See below.

> 2. This code name is already announced as in Russian community and in west
> open source world.
> 3. This name is derived from Sketch

Skencil is quite introduced as well, though I agree that sK1 is a stylish
name that is derived from it and its file format.

> 4. New name simplifies attracting new users. Unfortunately users choice
> first of all a modern UI and we often hear: "Skencil? Oh, it's an ugly
> Motif-style application. My choice is Inkscape/Xara/Karbon" So, even
> Skencil v1.0  will not  attract quickly large user pool. The same
> "reanimation" problem is highly important for tcl/tk widgetset.

Maybe, Skencil's reputation is not that bad I believe, but that depends
on whom you ask. It is true that Skencil's strength usually are a bit hidden.

> Regarding strategy I think that all three branches should be alive. As far
> as I understand Skencil v0.6 engine is used in production, therefore this
> branch should be supported. I'm not familiar with pyGtk therefore I cannot
> evaluate Gtk-based v0.7 usability as a base for derived products, but it
> seems it can be used as whole product and a part of pyGtk-based
> applications.

I think we should unite behind one branch, because our community is not large 
enough to support too many branches. It is a lot easier to join forces, even
when this might a bit strainful in the beginning. As far as I have understood
the v0.7 branch was to improve several things in the user interface and the 
implementation. However it never hit the road, thus even BH agrees that we
do not necessarily need to keep it.
Maintenance of 0.6 could be done at a minimum and even here BH did not get 
around doing much for it, so we could make the most active branch "sK1" the 
main branch. I think it would ideally use some analysing of BH's improvements
since sK1 was forked in both branches and an effort to merge them.
That BH did not do much development on the two branches also means it was less 
fun to him for whatever reasons. Merging his ideas in would raise the chance
a bit of getting him to contribute a bit in the future again.
Also if he and others in the Skencil community enbrance all one branch
this would certainly be important for those that admire BH's great work 
on Skencil.

> I cannot say that sK1 code can serve as reusable package, because sK1
> primary goal is a mature vector graphics editor. Also sK1 code is still
> unperfect and requires further development. But even in current state sK1
> can be presented as unique open source application for prepress. 

BTW I prefer the term "Free Software" over "open source", for reasons 
see http://www.fsfeurope.org/documents/whyfs.en.html

The goals of a "mature vector graphics editor" seems to be compatible
with Skencil's goal, unless somebody comes and want to use it as component,
I do not think we should make provisions for it.
That the separation of model-view-controler would enable
something like skconvert to be run in scripts is quite cool, so I would like 
to keep or extend this as another goal.

> Only  Scribus has similar features, but this application is not illustration
> program. So, my personal view of sK1 future is a competitor of CorelDRAW
> but on Linux platform. And future users pool should grow from former
> CorelDRAW users.

Well it would be cool if we could target windows as well as GNU/Linux
and X11 running plattform and even MacOS-X. Tcl/tk is pretty portable
and pyGTK was as well in the past, so this should be doable.
But this is more a personal goal. Having a great application for GNU/Linux
is a huge plus as well.

> Inkscape Team also declared that it's application is something like
> CorelDRAW or Illustrator, but on my opinion Inkscape is more similar to
> specialized editor like Macromedia Flash (at least on current development
> stage).

I cannot really judge, because I did not really use Inkscape a lot.
My next implementation target with Skencil (or sK1) or whatever would
be to add the map extension for the Thuban-Map-SVG. (Check out my svg export
extension for thuban.intevation.org ).

You did not answer the questions about the development infrastructure and
platform. Actually I think wald.intevation.org is not too bad and we will
keep improving it at Intevation because we need it for other projects
and we would be independent.

Best,
Bernhard

-- 
Managing Director - Owner: www.intevation.net      (Free Software Company)
Germany Coordinator: fsfeurope.org. Coordinator: www.Kolab-Konsortium.com.
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, DE; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998
Geschäftsführer Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wald.intevation.org/pipermail/skencil-users/attachments/20070621/7ddddc1b/attachment.pgp