Earlier quoted context omitted.
At this point I don’t think it’s controversial to say that this project existing has harmed creative tools on Linux. If another project had become the de-facto we’d have all those basic features. Instead we’re stuck with something that almost provides the basics ok, because it exists people treat it like a solved problem, and it has such a history no one’s allowed to say it just frankly isn’t usable for it’s one job.
I am confused why you think that Gimp somehow magically used all slots for image software development. It is not like it is extremely well funded or otherwise resource consuming. > because it exists people treat it like a solved problem People complaining about lack of alternative projects in open source is a new one for me > it has such a history no one’s allowed to say it just frankly isn’t usable for it’s one job.…
The linux distribution model seems to lead it to, somehow. If you open up a RedHat machine and ask it for a picture editor, you're going to get Gimp, even though Krita would almost certainly be better at doing what you want.