PIL 1.1.7 PNG bug?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

PIL 1.1.7 PNG bug?

Alex Clark
Hi,


Can anyone comment on the following with any intelligence?


- https://github.com/collective/Pillow/issues/10


As Pillow is primarily a packaging fork, I don't really want to go
changing the image code ;-). But, if it looks like a reasonable fix I
may consider it.


Thanks,



Alex



--
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net

_______________________________________________
Image-SIG maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PIL 1.1.7 PNG bug?

Charlie Clark-6
Hi Alex,

Am 22.09.2011, 00:37 Uhr, schrieb Alex Clark <[hidden email]>:

> Hi,
>   Can anyone comment on the following with any intelligence?
>   - https://github.com/collective/Pillow/issues/10
>   As Pillow is primarily a packaging fork, I don't really want to go  
> changing the image code ;-). But, if it looks like a reasonable fix I  
> may consider it.

I'd suggest that the issue be extended to include a test file and result  
and tested against PIL 1.1.7. As a happy user of Pillow I wouldn't like it  
to see it gain any internal patches.

Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Helmholtzstr. 20
Düsseldorf
D- 40215
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226
_______________________________________________
Image-SIG maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PIL 1.1.7 PNG bug?

Alex Clark
On 9/22/11 4:39 AM, Charlie Clark wrote:

> Hi Alex,
>
> Am 22.09.2011, 00:37 Uhr, schrieb Alex Clark <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Hi,
>> Can anyone comment on the following with any intelligence?
>> - https://github.com/collective/Pillow/issues/10
>> As Pillow is primarily a packaging fork, I don't really want to go
>> changing the image code ;-). But, if it looks like a reasonable fix I
>> may consider it.
>
> I'd suggest that the issue be extended to include a test file and result
> and tested against PIL 1.1.7. As a happy user of Pillow I wouldn't like
> it to see it gain any internal patches.


Right, in other words if I understand you correctly any internal patches
should only be applied if they directly correspond to previous or
upcoming changes in PIL itself. Even then, the preferred approach would
be to bulk-import the next PIL release into Pillow (and replace the
1.1.7 release code).


So, this issue should be filed against PIL where we can track it
appropriately (whether that means we wait for a new PIL release then
re-package it, or cherry pick and include specific things we know will
be in the next PIL release would depend on the circumstances.)


(IIRC there may have be one other fix like this, I'll dig back through
and check.)




Alex





>
> Charlie


--
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net

_______________________________________________
Image-SIG maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PIL 1.1.7 PNG bug?

Charlie Clark-6
Am 22.09.2011, 14:20 Uhr, schrieb Alex Clark <[hidden email]>:

> Right, in other words if I understand you correctly any internal patches  
> should only be applied if they directly correspond to previous or  
> upcoming changes in PIL itself. Even then, the preferred approach would  
> be to bulk-import the next PIL release into Pillow (and replace the  
> 1.1.7 release code).

Personally, I would like to see *no* internal changes in Pillow. It should  
just be the pip/easy_install compatible form of PIL, hopefully folded back  
in when distutils2 rules the waves.

>   So, this issue should be filed against PIL where we can track it  
> appropriately (whether that means we wait for a new PIL release then  
> re-package it, or cherry pick and include specific things we know will  
> be in the next PIL release would depend on the circumstances.)

The bug preferably with tests and patch should be passed upstream and if  
necessary another release of PIL cut. That would fit my definition of  
playing nicely with Fredrik's hard work.

BTW. Could you update the docs of Pillow to point to MacPorts or Brew as  
well as Fink for managing the required libraries? And it would be nice if  
we could get Pillow to hook up to the Windows binaries if possible.

Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Helmholtzstr. 20
Düsseldorf
D- 40215
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226
_______________________________________________
Image-SIG maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PIL 1.1.7 PNG bug?

Alex Clark
On 9/22/11 8:45 AM, Charlie Clark wrote:

> Am 22.09.2011, 14:20 Uhr, schrieb Alex Clark <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Right, in other words if I understand you correctly any internal
>> patches should only be applied if they directly correspond to previous
>> or upcoming changes in PIL itself. Even then, the preferred approach
>> would be to bulk-import the next PIL release into Pillow (and replace
>> the 1.1.7 release code).
>
> Personally, I would like to see *no* internal changes in Pillow. It
> should just be the pip/easy_install compatible form of PIL, hopefully
> folded back in when distutils2 rules the waves.

Roger that.

>
>> So, this issue should be filed against PIL where we can track it
>> appropriately (whether that means we wait for a new PIL release then
>> re-package it, or cherry pick and include specific things we know will
>> be in the next PIL release would depend on the circumstances.)
>
> The bug preferably with tests and patch should be passed upstream and if
> necessary another release of PIL cut. That would fit my definition of
> playing nicely with Fredrik's hard work.

I have no problem with, and I am interested in passing bugs upstream.
And indeed Pillow aims to be the "friendly" PIL fork :-). My concern (in
this case) lies with the release cycle. If I can get a fix into Pillow
and release it to PyPI within 24 hours, then I am strongly tempted to do so.

However, I certainly don't want to be irresponsible or disrespectful. So
if I did do this, I'd probably try to have a "good" explanation
(something along the lines of "this is going into PIL 1.1.8 anyway").

Another issue I just remembered: one of the things I'm tempted to do
with Pillow is research Python 3 compatibility. I suspect with the
"freedom" of the fork we might be able to produce some beta Pillow
releases that work on Python 3 (after doing all the hard work, of
course). This development would also be available to go upstream into
PIL as needed or desired.


>
> BTW. Could you update the docs of Pillow to point to MacPorts or Brew as
> well as Fink for managing the required libraries?

I have a ticket for this but haven't had a chance to work on it yet:

- https://github.com/collective/Pillow/issues/1


If anyone on this list has any direct and/or current experience with
MacPorts or Fink please feel free to send a pull request. I have used
all three and I currently use Brew, but I'm not sure what the
instructions for Brew would look like because I never use it to install
Pillow.


And it would be nice
> if we could get Pillow to hook up to the Windows binaries if possible.


The latest Pillow has a Windows binaries volunteer, if that helps. You
can download various win32 binaries for py2.4-py2.7 here:

- http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Pillow/1.7.5


Alex


>
> Charlie


--
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net

_______________________________________________
Image-SIG maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig