[switching to non-quiet flavor of bug address] On 12-07-28 at 12:09pm, Pascal de Bruijn wrote: > On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 12-07-28 at 12:42am, Pascal de Bruijn wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > On 12-07-27 at 10:08pm, Pascal de Bruijn wrote: > >> >> When Darktable is linked against an external Libraw (or for that > >> >> matter RawSpeed) library, we likely would get lots of camera > >> >> support bugs which aren't reproducible (assuming the Debian > >> >> Libraw version is older), wasting our time. Or we aren't getting > >> >> any valid camera support bugs reported (assuming the Debian > >> >> Libraw version is newer). So both cases (newer and older) are > >> >> detrimental to our project. > >> > > >> > Bugs from users of Debian should go to Debian for this exact > >> > reason: The Debian package maintainers should pass upstream to > >> > you the Darktable developers only bugs relevant for you. > >> > >> Yeah, but that's not reality. People will just come and ask on our > >> mailing lists and irc channels, often not telling us they are > >> running Debian (unless we specifically ask), wasting our time. > > > > I recognize that issue from users of Debian reporting bugs about > > packages derived from Debian but changed in various ways unknown to > > us. > > > > What I do with that is not try enforce one single use of the > > packages we provide, but a) tell our users that they are free to use > > Debian also in (to us) weird ways (that's one of the freedoms that > > DFSG-free licensing provides!), but b) they are strongly recommended > > to tell us very clearly up front when reporting bugs if their setup > > of Debian is unusual, to not waste our time e.g. chasing bugs > > inefficiently. > > I guess that's a similar issue. > > However, there is a difference with users personally modifying things. > And distributions shipping non-standard versions. > > We'd like to make sure that users get a user experience that is > representative of our intended Darktable user experience.
Users of Debian are not only personal. One user of Debian is the distribution Ubuntu. > >> >> So in my opinion Darktable should get a permanent exception to > >> >> this Debian policy. > >> >> > >> >> PS: Please don't misunderstand, I generally agree with the > >> >> policy in this regard, it's just that it makes very little sense > >> >> for projects like Darktable. > >> > > >> > Sorry, but I fail to see how this issue is any different from > >> > e.g. consumers of libexiv and the resulting changes to richness > >> > of the EXIF > >> > >> Having an older libexiv2 will not prevent files from being read at > >> all. Having an old libraw could result in images being "green" > >> instead of properly white balanced in some cases. And in even fewer > >> cases it could result in files not loading at all (where they > >> should have just loaded just fine (and/or not being green) with > >> unpatched darktable sources). > >> > >> > data supported with various versions of that library: as long as > >> > the API is the same, newest version of the library most often is > >> > preferred. > >> > >> Yes, but that isn't what happens in reality. What happens in > >> reality is that Debian is usually behind, really... > >> > >> > If I misunderstood and there is really something more intimate > >> > going on specifically with Darktable and its libraries could you > >> > please try elaborate more on that? > >> > >> With regard to the patch, LibRaw does RAW reading _and_ processing, > >> we only use the RAW reading bits (which is fairly atypical). But > >> the LibRaw processing bits don't support float DNGs (which we use > >> for HDR IIRC), so the LibRaw authors are blocking them from being > >> read. So we need to patch that up for our particular use. > >> > >> Besides the above, there is nothing more intimate going on, except > >> that I see lots of potential problems, with little or no gain at > >> all in our particular case. > > > > Thanks for the details. > > > > It still sound to me like Darktable would make good sense to link > > against shared libraries for Debian. > > I don't see how you'd resolve the float issue. But even if that were > to be resolved. What is the perceived benefit in this particular case? Same benefits as with other cases. This is nicely described in Debian Policy: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/footnotes.html#f30 Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
