When a project is going too big, changing will become difficult. It is impossible to accept every suggestion/patch, it will just break the ecosystem. I think all of us should understand the problem.
So should we think in another way, can it move some library, which is non-core, out of qt.io? Those library won't bundle with Qt installer. User grab them from somewhere. And ofcoz user could choose the version they need. It will be more flexible then centralize everything. p.s I use Qt for mobile application development, and that is an image application too. However, I found that the Camera API is not really enough to use. So finally I have decided to use native API. On 27 May 2015 at 01:42, Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> wrote: > Have between this and earlier replies, have we made a case for keeping > camera capture as it is in 5.4.1? How do we get this pushed through? How do > we do this with the Qt Governance Model which states: as a goal, "Put > decision power in the hands of the community, i.e. the people who > contribute to the Project’s success"? > > Thanks. > > > > > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 at 10:35 AM > > From: "Michael R Nelson" <mnel...@sutron.com> > > To: "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> > > Cc: "Interests Qt" <interest@qt-project.org> > > Subject: RE: [Interest] Let's talk about the upcoming Camera breakage in > 5.4.2 > > > > Jason makes some good points: > > > > 1. Developers trying to use Qt for mobile are indeed tracking the latest > patch builds > > 2. If we're on mobile, good chance we're doing image captures > > > > Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: interest-bounces+mnelson=sutron....@qt-project.org [mailto: > interest-bounces+mnelson=sutron....@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Jason H > > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 9:49 AM > > To: Jason H > > Cc: Interests Qt > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Let's talk about the upcoming Camera breakage in > 5.4.2 > > > > I've just confirmed via Commercial support that the changes cannot be > handled app-side, which means anyone doing camera capture properly in 5.4.1 > will not be able to do camera capture on Qt 5.4.2 > > > > Since 5.4.2 will break what is agreed as "proper" capture, I BEG THE > TROLLS TO LEAVE IT AS IT IS IN 5.4.1. > > > > You're going to have a lot of pissed off customers that are working, > then cease to work, then will work fine again with 5.5. > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 at 10:54 AM > > > From: "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> > > > To: "Gunnar Sletta" <gun...@sletta.org> > > > Cc: "Interests Qt" <interest@qt-project.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Let's talk about the upcoming Camera breakage > in 5.4.2 > > > > > > I can appreciate that. I do. However, I think most of the people > tracking the x.x.Y releases are likely to be mobile people, where there are > a lot of mobile-specific fixes going on, including lot of image capturing > on those mobile platforms. The Desktop is of course capable of capturing > images as well (I use As the 5.4.1 code "fixed" the camera capture issue, > desktop to build the app). But those of us doing mobile stuff very often > need the latest. I'd expect everyone who now has that code base to be > dependent on it. But we also need other fixes in 5.4.2. > > > > > > I suspect that the impact of reverting correct capture in 5.4.1 is > greater than those waiting for it to be broken again 5.4.2. Which is why I > raised the issue on this list. How many people are skipping/have > workarounds for 5.4.1, whereas everyone doing capture properly on 5.4.1 > will now be broken? > > > > > > I think we need to determine and proceed the path of least impact. If > I'm wrong, I'll back off. But since there are so many mobile fixes in the > x.x.Y releases, I have a hard time believing that is the case. > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 at 8:55 AM > > > > From: "Gunnar Sletta" <gun...@sletta.org> > > > > To: "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> > > > > Cc: "Interests Qt" <interest@qt-project.org> > > > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Let's talk about the upcoming Camera > breakage in 5.4.2 > > > > > > > > I’m sorry you are hit by this, but the idea was that people coming > from 5.3 to 5.4 would not suffer regressions and neither people moving from > 4.8, 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 -> 5.5 or from 5.4 LTS to 5.5 or 5.6 or any > other 5.6+ which already had workarounds in place which would have now been > broken. It is all about not breaking existing code. Yes, there will be a > few people who are affected by the fact that there was an well-intended > incompatibility introduced to 5.4.1 in the first place, but this only > affects those that are tracking the latest patch releases, and those are > not in majority. > > > > > > > > cheers, > > > > Gunnar > > > > > > > > > On 12 May 2015, at 17:42, Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I wanted to open this discussion up to anyone who is using a > Camera, who has working code in 5.4.1. > > > > > > > > > > Brief backstory: > > > > > At 5.4.1 introduced a fix that is is being removed in 5.4.2, > because it is considered a "behavior" change and not a bug fix. I think > this categorization is wrong, and I'm going to explain why. > > > > > The change pertains to the EXIF rotation header. So if you capture > in portraid mode, or upside down, Qt is aware of it. In 5.4.2, this is > being removed. > > > > > > > > > > The removal of this orientation flag mean now that images won't be > captured correctly, as they will have the incorrect aspect ratio from what > you expect. This has a rippling effect in that no longer can you capture a > picture pf the preview and display it pixel-for-pixel on a subsequent > screen. It is not just a rotation issue. I've done the rotation fix (which > is quite simple) and it messes more things up than that. This causes > additional code to be written by Qt customers to target 5.4.2 specifically. > > > > > > > > > > But here's the kicker. The orientation is being put back in to > 5.5. Meaning that customers who were looking for a few bug fixes in 5.4.2, > will have to write additional code for one version of Qt, then back it out > for 5.5. I think for all the customers doing camera capture on 5.4.1 (I > assume this is all of the customers using camera capture) we will need to > write code on 5.4.2, then back it out. > > > > > > > > > > Ideally, I'd like to get the EXIF orientation put back into in > 5.4.2. > > > > > I'd like to propose a compromise, if we can't get EXIF orientation > reinstated in 5.4.2. Which is addition of a flag to use orientation or not. > This way we can have both ways. But this would be an API change and likely > be dis-allowed from the start. I want to make sure that all Qt users know > of the upcoming breakage in Qt 5.4.2 and are available to release their > concerns, so that the Qt team knows the extent that people will be pissed > off from the change. If it's just me, then fine, I will accept that, but > anyone doing camera capture on 5.4.1 should be concerned about this change. > > > > > > > > > > If in fact the Qt does decide to break the "proper" behavior > ,(since it's going to be in 5.5 after all!) then Qt users need to be given > a turn-key fix to support 5.4.2 in the interim. It isn't proper that we > have to scramble for fixes for a x.x.Y release when we know it is temporary > breakage. > > > > > > > > > > Thank you and please chime in. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Interest mailing list > > > > > Interest@qt-project.org > > > > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org > > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Interest mailing list > > Interest@qt-project.org > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest >
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
