Metapackages review: junior-art

[Ben Armstrong]

On Tue, 2006-02-07 at 10:36 -0800, Bill Kendrick wrote:
> I'm not too familiar with xpaint, but it's arguable that something like 
> it is needed _along with_ Tux Paint (and as an alternate to The GIMP).
> 
> Tux Paint has no facilities for cropping/resizing images to fitting into
> emails or on webpages, nor a particularly easy way to get existing images
> in and out of the program.
> 
> For for the very youngest, Tux Paint is about all they need.
> As kids get older and start playing with graphics for icons, web pages,
> their own games ;^), etc., they'll need something more flexible (when it
> comes to actually manipulating the _files_, if not the content of the image.)
> 
> This is what most people use GIMP or Krita for, but those are arguably
> "adult- and late-teen-only" applications, due to their complex interface.
> So something in between seems in order.

I disagree that the Gimp is adult and late-teen-only.  My 11-year-old
has been using it four about four years now, is quite comfortable with
it, and has even helped his mother with it.

But your arguments for keeping xpaint are compelling.

I'd make all three of these applications junior::core, especially
considering that this category is so small.

Tuxpaint I would make junior::early, but not xpaint, as the user
interface is a bit tricky for the 2 to 4 year old range.

I haven't tried krita.  Is it worth considering for junior::extra?  Are
there any other 'art' apps we should review?  Does debtags even provide
us with useful tags for finding them?  I would have expected something
like use::drawing, but under the use:: facet, the gimp and xpaint
packages only have use::editing (rather generic, and applies to
text-editors as well as graphical editors) whereas tuxpaint has
use::learning and use::gameplaying.  I don't think tuxpaint should be
considered a game, even though it is fun to use.

Ben