Re: Removing import Postscript as PDF feature?
El divendres, 24 de novembre de 2023, a les 10:29:22 (CET), Oliver Sander va escriure: > > I'm also trying to flip it around a bit. If this was proposed today where > > we have a postscript generator in okular, would we accept this feature? > Also, don't you get the same functionality by loading the postscript as > postscript, and then printing it to a file (at least in principle)? I'd > consider that way of converting postscript to pdf more natural. This is a good point, if loading the PS directly gives a similar experience than converting the PS to PDF on the fly, then my argument about people being sad doesn't apply. To be honest I have no idea if the functionality is similar, i don't think i've ever used the feature. Cheers, Albert > > Best, > Oliver
Re: Removing import Postscript as PDF feature?
El divendres, 24 de novembre de 2023, a les 9:49:15 (CET), Sune Stolborg Vuorela va escriure: > On Friday, November 24, 2023 12:53:31 AM CET Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > What do we win by removing the code? It's like 10 lines of code i guess? > > it is just 2 digits lines of code, yes. But there is some bugs in it. > - Paper size > - memory leaks on conversion failure > - no user feedback on conversion failure > - Not that good user experience if ps2pdf not available > > I'm also trying to flip it around a bit. If this was proposed today where > we have a postscript generator in okular, would we accept this feature? No, would probably not be accepted, but that's not a fair question, because the feature is here, potentially used by people (we should add kuserfeeddback to have actual data about this) that will be sad that the feature is removed. The fact that it can be done using the command line doesn't matter, we can't ask regular users to use the command line, if we do that, we've lost. > > All of this can be fixed, but I'd rather just remove it because I don't yet > see the value in it. There's also no need to fix it, the code has existed for 2 decades and AFAIK there's no bug about any of those things you mention. Cheers, Albert > > /Sune
Re: Removing import Postscript as PDF feature?
I'm also trying to flip it around a bit. If this was proposed today where we have a postscript generator in okular, would we accept this feature? Also, don't you get the same functionality by loading the postscript as postscript, and then printing it to a file (at least in principle)? I'd consider that way of converting postscript to pdf more natural. Best, Oliver smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Removing import Postscript as PDF feature?
On Friday, November 24, 2023 12:53:31 AM CET Albert Astals Cid wrote: > What do we win by removing the code? It's like 10 lines of code i guess? it is just 2 digits lines of code, yes. But there is some bugs in it. - Paper size - memory leaks on conversion failure - no user feedback on conversion failure - Not that good user experience if ps2pdf not available I'm also trying to flip it around a bit. If this was proposed today where we have a postscript generator in okular, would we accept this feature? All of this can be fixed, but I'd rather just remove it because I don't yet see the value in it. /Sune -- I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world. And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist. - zefrank
Re: Removing import Postscript as PDF feature?
El dimecres, 22 de novembre de 2023, a les 14:01:03 (CET), Sune Stolborg Vuorela va escriure: > Hi > I was just reading over bits of okular source code and suddenly discovered > "Import postscript as PDF" in the main menu. > > I'm considering removing it, but before I propose a patch doing it, I would > love to have some feedback first. > > Reasons to remove: > - Okular can open postcript by itself > - It clutters up the menu > - There is a open bug report that it always uses US Letter as papersize > when importing, and no gentle way of fixing it without exposing a > complicated dialog - It is implented by running an external command > (ps2pdf) to do the heavy lifting > - If your platform doesn't have libspectre, it likely also doesn't > have ps2pdf > - if ps2pdf is not found, it is not immediately clear to the user how to > solve > - Error handling in case of ps2pdf failing is nonexisting > > Reasons to keep: > - If you have a okular compiled in a nonstandard configuration, but with > pdf support, you can later install ps2pdf and be able to view postscript > files anyway > > The feature in question was added back in 2005; that was back when okular > was kpdf and has not been touched much since then. > > Any one for? > Any one against? What do we win by removing the code? It's like 10 lines of code i guess? Cheers, Albert > > /Sune
Re: Removing import Postscript as PDF feature?
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 13:01, Sune Stolborg Vuorela wrote: > > Any one for? > Any one against? > As far as I'm concerned, you can remove it. My main reason for that stance is that, as you wrote, the feature is implemented by calling an external program (ps2pdf), meaning you might as well use that program in the first place. However, I'm comfortable using the command line, and some people who are not might appreciate the feature being part of okular. Regards, Albert Wik.
