
Consider Renaming Gimp to a Less Offensive Name - jordigh
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/issues/3617
======
nhumrich
While I don't disagree with the people wanting to change the name here, I cant
help but realize that they are essentially bullying the maintainers. The
maintainers are people who spend their free time to work on a project they
never get paid for. Sure its a project we all seem to use, but it's also their
project. I don't feel like its anyones place to force them into something they
dont want to do. The thread started civil but then turned into cyber bullying.
Funny how those trying to "prevent bullying" are the very ones doing it.

~~~
mntmoss
This is the way with any issue of public importance, which, as a capital-F
Free Software project with a lengthy history and many contributors, GIMP has
grown into. The software's functionality is commendable, and they have made
some strides on UX as well. That makes it worth recommending, but for the
parts that hold it back, of which the name is increasingly a major one.

When these issues come up, and there is a perception of gatekeeping behavior,
protest is normal. The developers hold the power here. And developer arguments
to avoid popular change tend to become more incoherent as the popularity of
the software grows, because it positions them as both serving a popular
interest(lots of users, open development) and not(private whims trumping
popular ones). Developers on prominent products with many users generally are
not following their fancy anymore; they are making their career. If they want
to sully their career, dying on this hill is a way to do it.

~~~
_dps
> The developers hold the power here.

They do not, this is exactly the point of free software. Anyone can fork it
and release their fork under a different name. Don't want to do that work? Too
bad. Want to force the developers to do it? Now which party is attempting to
exercise power?

The only thing the developers are doing is refusing to modify their free gift
to the community to line up with other people's non-technical priorities. This
is not an exercise of power — is it simply reminding people that free software
contributors are not indentured servants.

~~~
djsumdog
Exactly. Someone unhappy with the name, but wants to contribute to the
product, can fork the project with a different name and start putting all
their patches in there.

If their features are good, they might get backported to the other project.
That person may continue to rebase off the original as well. Eventually you
might have two packages in all the major distros and CI that helps keep both
trees in sync.

That really is the right way forward here. Or ... the person could just make a
CI that pulls, applies a single script that renames and rebrands everything,
and then rerelease packages. That's all they have to do .. and if it catches
on, well then they've made a change without having to bother the original
developers at all.

------
siphon22
Wonder how many people who are up in arms about the name actually use GIMP?
And how many of those are willing to monetarily compensate them for the lost
recognition in the event they do change their name and are forced to start
from scratch?

It is strange that the title words it as "Gimp" when GIMP has always been
"GIMP", which has a very specific meaning(it stands for GNU Image Manipulation
Program) that has nothing to do with the word "gimp".

I've used GIMP since I was in middle school and I have never ever known that
it was a homophone for the more offensive term. I grew up in California and
also never heard anyone use this term as an insult to anyone. Do non-
American/English speaking GIMP users not have a say in this? Why do they have
to have their GIMP become something else just because it happens to sound like
a bad word in some other language?

It'll be a huge shame if they go through with this, but even if it does, I
will always refer to their work as GIMP, the GNU Image Manipulation Program.

~~~
leolambda
> Wonder how many people who are up in arms about the name actually use GIMP?

I, for one, use it every day. Have you taken a look at the discussion? Your
questions are pretty thoroughly addressed, which, along with your final line
here, make me think you're more interested in your desire to use ableist slurs
and the holy right of software maintainers to ignore any and all criticism
without consequences than anything else.

Let us be clear: Nobody in this issue thread cares _at all_ about whether it
was "meant" to convey the same meaning as the word "gimp". It is factually
true that people find it awkward to recommend in professional settings because
of its name, and sometimes the name makes adoption impossible.

Obviously nobody can force the maintainers to do anything, but we can _ask_
them to change a superficial component of their excellent software to make it
much more useful, which is what this issue was.

~~~
siphon22
For the vast majority of the non-English world, GIMP means nothing except what
it stands for, and the same goes for me.

You have to note, "gimp" and "GIMP" mean completely different things.

~~~
leolambda
For the vast majority of the non-English world, the acronym for a project
called "C UNIX Networking Toolkit" doesn't mean anything but the project's
name. That doesn't mean going around using that acronym is a good idea.

~~~
siphon22
That particular word is a bit more ubiquitous even internationally so I'd say
there's a huge difference.

~~~
leolambda
So, great! We've agreed that there _is_ a line, right? A line after which a
word is too offensive to too many people to use as a project name; a line over
which it's sensible for your users to reasonably and respectfully ask you to
change the name, and expect more than a "No. Closed." in response? And your
argument is, GIMP doesn't go over that line?

~~~
siphon22
Well yes, for me in California and much of the non-English speaking world,
before this "issue" was brought up had no idea what "gimp" was. If anything,
the pro-change side has done nothing except raise the awareness of the
offensive term and we will likely see an increase in attacks using that term
due to it.

I can't imagine changing the innocent name of my project because it happened
to be a homophone of a mean word in some other language.

~~~
leolambda
Except, you said you CAN imagine that. I just gave you an example of EXACTLY
that and you agreed that it was too far. So, clearly, you have some kind of
double standard here.

You're arguing in bad faith and it's making you look silly. Stop it.

~~~
siphon22
I most certainly am not arguing in bad faith. The last sentence is an
utterance of my own personal feeling about things. But objectively I could see
why the name of the other project you mentioned would be an issue.
Regrettably, that term is a lot more well known and widely used and I accept
why they would change it. I did not say I agreed with it and I especially do
not here with GIMP. I am not able to morally justify forcing them to change
their project name, since I really do not think of GIMP as anything other than
the image editing program I've always used, like the vast majority of the
world. I'm sorry that you and various regions of the U.S. are inflicted with
such a slur to begin with.

~~~
leolambda
> forcing them

Opening an issue is not forcing. It's asking. Do we at least agree there?

~~~
siphon22
Sure, but you want them to do it right and are willing to fight for it right?
If they end up having to do it due to those pressures, that is very much
having their hand forced.

------
dngray
without naming names I see a lot of SJW in that issue without very many
commits/participation in the open source community.

Also the maintainers gave their reply as it is their prerogative to do so.

> _Michael Natterer @mitch · 5 hours ago Maintainer_

> _Sorry, the name will not change, closing. Michael Natterer @mitch closed 5
> hours ago_

So JordiGH, you needn't re-open the issue
[https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/issues/3618](https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/issues/3618)
and post to HN with the hopes of generating outrage against the GIMP project
for not doing what you want.

~~~
leolambda
I have to agree. Please, everyone, if you're going to engage with this, look
at
[https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/issues/3617](https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/issues/3617)
and the discussion (and lack thereof) there.

As someone who likes to think that I do have as many "commits/participation"
as many others, I would appreciate it if people would focus on the core
argument:

It is hard to get people to use this software, who would otherwise benefit,
because of their perception of the name, and it's easier to change the name
once than change those perceptions every single time.

If you have problems with THAT, I'd love to discuss them, but please leave
"SJWism" and whatever out of it - that's not really what's at issue here.

~~~
dngray
> _As someone who likes to think that I do have as many
> "commits/participation" as many others, I would appreciate it if people
> would focus on the core argument_

The reason this is important is because in recent times essentially nobodies
like to pop out of the woodwork with "ideas" like this. They then like to
"shame" people who don't agree with them. There's nothing wrong with expecting
people to build up a reputation before suggesting divisive and controversial
ideas.

------
reitanqild
[https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#i-dont-like-the-
name-...](https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#i-dont-like-the-name-gimp-
will-you-change-it)

Except for this? By all means consider renaming it.

Or keep it to spite everyone who comes from the outside and tries to destroy
hacker culture.

Because that's what people are doing, destroying hacker culture just like we
destroyed other cultures before.

Yes, in some cases the new culture is better, but why oh why do we have to
destroy everything funny or unusual in the process.

This comes from someone who sometimes has to stand up for his group in other
settings. Why can't society let us - and the hacker culture - alone as long as
we adhere to the laws?

If the GIMP won't be a commercial success - fine. Or someone can fork it and
package it under another name - fine. Or the maintainers can sell out - or
even agree - fine.

But can't we stop this war against all forms of old school fun and what should
I say - diversity?

~~~
krapp
You claim to want to stop what you see as a war against fun and diversity,
after insisting that anyone who doesn't share the same juvenile sense of humor
as you, or who disagrees with the name of a software project, must be an
outsider trying to destroy hacker culture?

So do you want diversity or conformity, then? Stop with the gatekeeping BS,
please. You don't get to say what hacker culture is or who belongs in it.

~~~
reitanqild
> Stop with the gatekeeping BS, please. You don't get to say what hacker
> culture is or who belongs in it.

I'm not gatekeeping here, only suggesting that people behave nicely in other
peoples houses so to speak.

From the link I pasted it is quite clear what the GIMP maintainers used to
think about this. If they reconsider I'm fine with that as well, I'm not
attached to the name. _But I am fed up with people coming to invade others
cultures for the sake of making them acceptable to a certain subset of what
seems to be extremely privileged people._

------
GiorgioG
Here's an idea: Why doesn't this guy (and anyone that agrees with him) spend
23 years building his own graphics editor, naming it whatever he likes?

~~~
siphon22
GIMP is free software, so maybe they can just fork it and rename it :P

~~~
GiorgioG
Yep they could, but then they'd have to figure out how the software is built,
rather than just shitting on the name.

I'm just going to leave this right here:
[https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Snowflake)

~~~
leolambda
As someone who participated in this issue, I want to let you know that we
chose to engage the current maintainers before forking because that's the
nice, respectful thing to do. I, personally, find it extremely aggravating
when people fork projects over minor decisions like this. It leads to a huge
amount of wasted effort on both sides.

As it is, we're likely to either fork the project (which is underway at the
moment), or build a GIMP keybinding compatibility layer for Krita; the second
is less preferable because it would require quite a lot of hacking to make the
more advanced features work, and would almost certainly not reach 100% parity.

As you note, either one will be a good deal of effort; another reason we
wanted to at least ask the maintainers if they would be willing to accept a
patch with the name change, instead.

Now what was your point, other than to insult some people whose argument you
almost certainly didn't read?

~~~
GiorgioG
I actually did read the thread thank you very much. My point is people want to
bitch about a trivial thing (yes it is my opinion that this is a trivial
matter.) How much effort and time are you willing to spend on such a minor
thing as a 4 character string? I predict someone will fork it, and in a year's
time it'll be abandoned and not kept up to date because they'll simply move
onto the next trivial matter which offends you folks.

Frankly, few will use your fork anyway because it provides zero value vs the
established name/brand.

~~~
leolambda
So, you read the issue. What is it you fail to grasp about the conversation "I
think, rather than buying Photoshop, you should use this software." "We can't
use software with a name like that."

That's a conversation I've had, in real life, with a professor and a
professional photographer.

Literally, the only thing holding them back was the name.

How is that zero value?!

~~~
siphon22
I'm going to jump in and say this.

Let's be real here. You can't even make a circle in GIMP without jumping
through various hoops. Right now, the hurdle for those professionals is just
the name, but wait until you see when they actually try using the tools.
They'll happily pay for Photoshop once they realize that what they wanted
after all was just a free Photoshop. This is quite a different angle I am
arguing from, but it's my pragmatic side. I believe GIMP should maintain it's
current userbase that was earned through over 20 years of hard work under
their current name, instead of chasing customers that will unlikely appreciate
their project anyway.

~~~
GiorgioG
This. I’ve used Photoshop since v4. Every time I try to use the latest version
of GIMP I run away and happily pay for Photoshop because I choose not spend
time to learn how to use GIMP (or Pixelmator on Mac.)

------
godzillabrennus
This shouldn’t even be a debate. The name is horrible in every sense that
matters to gaining adoption.

~~~
CydeWeys
Seriously. Even a super generic name like "GPaint" would be a huge
improvement. Some parts of the Free Software world are run by programmers and
programmers only and it _shows_. It would benefit to listen to a marketing
person every once in awhile.

~~~
nhumrich
To be fair, it's open source software that makes the maintainers of it $0 of
profit. Its closer to a form of art than it is a product. It might just be
they don't actually care to gain adoption or "win the market".

~~~
CydeWeys
As someone who's written and released his own Free Software, I have to say, I
at least definitely cared about getting users. Most of the fun is in your
product actually being used, not just it being out there. I never did anything
remotely as important as Gimp, but if someone had come along and offered some
simple services like "Let me design a cool logo for your project" I'd have
jumped at the chance. I can't imagine Gimp hasn't had similar opportunities.

------
writepub
There is no grace in sullying innocent people selflessly building a fine free
product, while asking nothing in return. The mental gymnastics and energy
employed in attributing malice is much better spent in improving the product.

Better yet, fork the product, rename it and do with it as you please. The
authors are generous enough to allow that.

------
watertom
I'm not a very sensitive or "PC" person but the name has always bothered me,
so much so that I won't use it or recommend it anyone only because of the
name.

------
gnusty_gnurc
This is mentioned in the FAQ and it's exceedingly clear and reasonable:

> Finally, if you still have strong feelings about the name “GIMP”, you should
> feel free to promote the use of the long form GNU Image Manipulation Program
> or maintain your own releases of the software under a different name.

[https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#i-dont-like-the-
name-...](https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#i-dont-like-the-name-gimp-
will-you-change-it)

~~~
CydeWeys
Maybe someone should do that, then. I'd be onboard with it. Then I could
reference it by a better name and feel more OK with recommending it.

The problem is, how many large Linux distros will accept a new package into
their package managers that is essentially the exact same thing as an existing
package, just with a different name and logo assets? For this to be truly
successful, it has to be as easy as `apt-get install gpaint` (insert better
name here).

~~~
gnusty_gnurc
I'm not completely familiar but I get the sense that building a snap package
isn't that much of a hurdle if there's such a big need for a renamed fork.

~~~
CydeWeys
I haven't had great experiences with Snap packages, to be honest. And the fact
that they use their own sandboxed filesystem is really inconvenient for an
image editing app.

I probably won't be installing any more Snap packages.

~~~
gnusty_gnurc
Ok...then flatpak or appimage...there's a clear omnipresent issue here where
people argue over petty issues that fragment and polarize the software
ecosystem and it's only worse that resources are heavily constrained and
voluntary. I don't mean this to discount your concern, but you're making a
strong ask from a community that's based completely on loosely-coordinated
voluntary efforts. If you want change - advocacy is not enough and frankly
counterproductive. Start solving your problem and paying it forward to the
people that you think will benefit.

------
mkr-hn
The name isn't even good _before_ considering the word's meaning.

------
kakkun
Yeah, I definitely ran into issues when Googling to see whether I could use
LaTeX within GIMP.

~~~
nhumrich
Interestingly enough, duck duck go does way better at that search term than
google does

------
jacobjuul
I don't agree nor disagree since I've never heard that word used for anything
else than the software. But by this logic, we should also rename _git_

~~~
mkr-hn
Git is not without issues, but it's not as bad as this word.

There are two common ways to see gimp beyond what its defenders put forward:

1: A kink thing.

2: What the kink is based on: [https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/gimp](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gimp)
-> [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cripple](https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/cripple)

Neither one is great for adoption.

>> _" I've never heard that word used for anything else than the software."_

There are a lot of words I didn't know were common slurs, or at least
inaccurate or otherwise not okay until someone told me. For example: Eskimo
(colonist nonsense), Gypsy (name given to Romani people based on mistaken
belief they came from Egypt), Indian (some native people use it, but not all).

Learning is great.

------
Causality1
>The most modern and often used version of the word "gimp" is an ableist
insult.

Untrue. The most common usage is as an adjective/verb that has nothing to do
with disabled people. "Switching from C to Java really gimped our
performance." "Our marketing in Mexico is gimped because we didn't hire a
native Spanish speaker."

Also this is pretty rich coming from GNOME, considering that's used as an
insulting name for little person.

~~~
smt88
> _really gimped our performance_

I'm a native English speaker in the US and have never heard or read "gimp"
used as an adjective this way. Never.

I have heard it used as a slur against people with disabilities many times, in
real life, movies, and books.

Even the usage you're claiming is the most common sounds like it's a synonym
for "cripple".

The entire etymology for the word "gimp" supports that it was conceived
originally as a slur and continues to be used that way.

[https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/gimp](https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/gimp)

Either way, why would anyone want to download something with that name? It's
embarrassing to recommend it to people.

~~~
flukus
> really gimped our performance

It's used that way in Australia, the only time in my life I've heard gimp used
in a derogatory way was in pulp fiction.

But this illustrates a big problem with all these PC crusades lately, they're
trying to apply US (at least parts of the US) cultural norms to international
projects, often at the expense of alienating most of the world.

~~~
leolambda
> PC crusades

It's not a "crusade" in any sense. It's one issue on a GitLab that someone
decided to link over here (not one of the people who made the issue, I think).
It is about "political correctness" only in that it's genuinely hard to get
some people to even consider using this free software because, and ONLY
because, of its name.

I think you should rethink your idea of a crusade if you think this is what
that word means.

~~~
flukus
This is hardly an isolated event, it's not just a single issue on a single
project.

> It is about "political correctness" only in that it's genuinely hard to get
> some people to even consider using this free software because, and ONLY
> because, of its name.

People that vain will find something else to dislike about it.

------
ToFab123
The snowflake generation do get offended by everything.

~~~
dang
Please don't do this here, even when something seems wrong or annoying.

Would you mind reviewing the site guidelines and sticking to them? Their
intention is to try to keep this place from degrading so that it can remain
interesting for all of us.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

~~~
ToFab123
Ok. I understand

