Re: [Jgimp-developers] Re: FilmGimp integration

[Michael T. <mt...@cc...>]

Hi all -

>>As per an external install -- I think it probably does make the most
>>sense to have it as an external install. Save that, you would want to
>>have a configure switch to enable/disable the capability when compiling
>>Film Gimp. 
> 
> We shouldn't do that, unless there is something flawed with JGimp that we
> should be told about. Making Java optional would mean confusion for users
> and make Java plug-ins of diminished value.

Yup, I see your point. OK, but one thing we will definitely want to have 
is the ability for the configure script to fail gracefully if no JDK is 
installed in the system -- you don't want Java to be a requirement to 
use Film Gimp. So a configure script that keeps running and compiles 
without JGimp, and that also includes switches to enable/disable it 
would be necessary, I think. I could make these changes, but it would 
take awhile because I am not familiar with how configure scripts are 
constructed.

> Well, everything we do seems in flux. We might not include anything if that
> was a disqualification! The question is, will JGimp destabilize Film Gimp?
> If the answer is no and it is functional enough to justify being included,
> we should go ahead and bring it in as a standard part of our release. It
> helps that decision that JGimp is under 200k.

It's difficult for me to tell whether JGimp destabilizes Film Gimp at 
this point. I know it doesn't cleanly exit at times, but it's unclear 
why that happens. I'll take a look at it sometime when I have time.

> Not as such, but the blur plug-in is simple enough. Can you use that as your
> guide?

Yup, that's how I rolled the JGimp Makefile :) Thanks.

Mike

Michael Terry
Everyday Computing Lab, GVU Center
College of Computing, Georgia Tech
mt...@cc...