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
