02-12-2021, 11:41 PM
(02-12-2021, 06:14 PM)rickk Wrote:(02-12-2021, 04:25 PM)dhugg Wrote: wow,
its been a long time since i looked forward to going to a new release of software only to have the new version offer much less than the one being replaced (see windows 8)!!
i am hoping that my ignorance and lack of experience is the reason and that it can all be fixed.
i cant figure out for the life of me why anyone would design a new release that ignores all the hard work the users have put in to create expanded functionality through scripts. from a distance it looks like they purposely slightly renamed variables so that scripts we are all used to using don't work. i have gone through the effort of changing some of the scripts so they work for me but for the most part i find myself going to the old version 2.8 to complete a job because i need a script or two that they rendered useless??
i've read the release notes and while there is much improvement in the "inner workings" to the software what good is it if you end up removing functionality from the end product???
i also read where you can just "constantize" an old script and it will magically work but it never has for me yet!! after all if that was the case why didn't development just constantize each script before release... because it doesn't work!! i don't understand why people would waste their time in the future writing scripts if they understand that a new release makes them useless!!
i was a mainframe programmer for 30 years and i know that in all 30 of those years i would have lost my career if i did not consider, and plan for, a "transition" from the old software to the new often times called seamless.
i think it is important to realize that not every person using the software is a graphic artist specialist or programmer!
please tell me that i have something wrong so that i can apologize for being so negative but the end product is DISAPPOINTING as is!!!
thanks for listening,
As a fellow user, I certainly share the very same sense of frustration as you describe. But you know the old alibi of free software developers..."hey, would you like your money back?"
All in all, it's an interesting conflict between the need for progress, vs legacy functionality. If I was smarter, perhaps I would understand why newer releases of Linux cannot support older versions of Python (in addition to the currently popular version).
Or, alternatively, why legacy applications that are dependent upon older versions, cannot have self contained Python 2.x "subsystems" that support their specific needs.
Ah well, I guess the best solution in the interim is to maintain a gimp 2.8.x install working, until the compatibility problems get ironed out?
Python 3.0 started in 2008, at the same time as Python 2.6. Since 2010 it is known that support for 2.7 will end in 2020, and Linux distros worked hard to migrate a large code base of Python v2 scripts to v3 (Python v2.7 owes its longevity to the sheer amount of system utilities written with it).
In practice you can still install Python v2 on your Linux, but you won't find much software still using it, Gimp must be the exception. And if you want want a contained Python v2 with Gimp, the "flatpak" packaging of Gimp comes with its own Python v2.