Re: [Pixman] Plan to release final development version before stable branch

[Oded Gabbay]

On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Bill Spitzak  wrote:
> I suspect I will need to check the X server version, actually. That seems to
> be what the other tests are doing.
>
> My main concern is to figure out *which* version this (will) happen in. I am
> hoping this can be known before code release so Cairo can be updated to use
> it at the same time.
>
Don't worry, you will full visibility into which version this code
will get into.
If I had to guess right now, I would say 0.35.2, which is the stable
release of the next development tree. Estimated time is March-April
2016

Oded

> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Oded Gabbay  wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Bill Spitzak  wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Oded Gabbay 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Bill Spitzak 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Oded Gabbay 
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Bill Spitzak 
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Oded Gabbay
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Bill Spitzak
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > Can you include my patches to fix the filtering? They have been
>> >> >> >> > posted
>> >> >> >> > for a
>> >> >> >> > long time now.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > The last patch makes GOOD/BEST use filtering for scaling images
>> >> >> >> > down.
>> >> >> >> > This
>> >> >> >> > matches the current Cairo behavior and would allow Cairo to use
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > pixman
>> >> >> >> > backend rather than doing an image fallback for any image
>> >> >> >> > scaling
>> >> >> >> > smaller
>> >> >> >> > than .75. It also contains a bunch of minor optimizaion and
>> >> >> >> > filter
>> >> >> >> > selection
>> >> >> >> > tweaks that makes the output somewhat better than current
>> >> >> >> > Cairo.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Hi Bill,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Unfortunately, I don't see anyone reviewed your patches, and from
>> >> >> >> what
>> >> >> >> I heard, those are quite significant changes.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> It's a shame you didn't bring this up when I did the first
>> >> >> >> development
>> >> >> >> release 4 months ago. Then we had enough time to check and test
>> >> >> >> it.
>> >> >> >> I'm quite hesitant of including such changes right before the
>> >> >> >> final
>> >> >> >> development version, even with a review.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I did send email on May 22, 2015, in response to your comments.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That's strange, because I only started working on pixman during June
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> 2015...
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > You are right. That was just a general email I sent trying to get
>> >> > somebody
>> >> > to look at the patches. Searching in the history I found 3 of these.
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> I suggest that you try to contact one of pixman's veterans
>> >> >> >> (Soren,
>> >> >> >> Siarhei, Matt, Pekka, Ben) offline and ask them nicely to at
>> >> >> >> least
>> >> >> >> skim over the patches and give a high-level opinion about the
>> >> >> >> series.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > These were discussed with Soren before. He disagreed with my
>> >> >> > previous
>> >> >> > version because I changed to a single filter calculation rather
>> >> >> > than
>> >> >> > his
>> >> >> > pair of filters being convoluted. This version preserves the pair
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> > filters, with some fixes of bugs that caused artifacts in the
>> >> >> > resulting
>> >> >> > filters. I'm sending email directly in case they are not reading
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > pixman
>> >> >> > list.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Could you send me those emails ?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I forwarded the big one from him and my response. The patches I have
>> >> > had
>> >> > since then I believe address his concerns and preserve the 2-filter
>> >> > convolution api, they are just bug fixes and some efficiency changes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Also, check if you need to rebase the patches against current
>> >> >> >> pixman
>> >> >> >> and if so, maybe send the series again. It might stir up a
>> >> >> >> discussion.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > The patches applied to the newest version without any conflicts
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > my
>> >> >> > test
>> >> >> > programs still work. I have resent them to the pixman mailing
>> >> >> > list.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Great!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I'm willing to review them in terms of correctness and code
>> >> >> >> style,
>> >> >> >> but
>> >> >> >> I'm not veteran enough in pixman to give an opinion on the
>> >> >> >> underlying
>> >> >> >> changes (which is the most important issue).
>> 

Re: [Pixman] Plan to release final development version before stable branch

[Bill Spitzak]

I suspect I will need to check the X server version, actually. That seems
to be what the other tests are doing.

My main concern is to figure out *which* version this (will) happen in. I
am hoping this can be known before code release so Cairo can be updated to
use it at the same time.

On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Oded Gabbay  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Bill Spitzak  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Oded Gabbay 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Bill Spitzak 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Oded Gabbay 
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Bill Spitzak 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Oded Gabbay <
> oded.gab...@gmail.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Bill Spitzak  >
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > Can you include my patches to fix the filtering? They have been
> >> >> >> > posted
> >> >> >> > for a
> >> >> >> > long time now.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > The last patch makes GOOD/BEST use filtering for scaling images
> >> >> >> > down.
> >> >> >> > This
> >> >> >> > matches the current Cairo behavior and would allow Cairo to use
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > pixman
> >> >> >> > backend rather than doing an image fallback for any image
> scaling
> >> >> >> > smaller
> >> >> >> > than .75. It also contains a bunch of minor optimizaion and
> filter
> >> >> >> > selection
> >> >> >> > tweaks that makes the output somewhat better than current Cairo.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Hi Bill,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Unfortunately, I don't see anyone reviewed your patches, and from
> >> >> >> what
> >> >> >> I heard, those are quite significant changes.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It's a shame you didn't bring this up when I did the first
> >> >> >> development
> >> >> >> release 4 months ago. Then we had enough time to check and test
> it.
> >> >> >> I'm quite hesitant of including such changes right before the
> final
> >> >> >> development version, even with a review.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I did send email on May 22, 2015, in response to your comments.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's strange, because I only started working on pixman during June
> of
> >> >> 2015...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > You are right. That was just a general email I sent trying to get
> >> > somebody
> >> > to look at the patches. Searching in the history I found 3 of these.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> I suggest that you try to contact one of pixman's veterans (Soren,
> >> >> >> Siarhei, Matt, Pekka, Ben) offline and ask them nicely to at least
> >> >> >> skim over the patches and give a high-level opinion about the
> >> >> >> series.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > These were discussed with Soren before. He disagreed with my
> previous
> >> >> > version because I changed to a single filter calculation rather
> than
> >> >> > his
> >> >> > pair of filters being convoluted. This version preserves the pair
> of
> >> >> > filters, with some fixes of bugs that caused artifacts in the
> >> >> > resulting
> >> >> > filters. I'm sending email directly in case they are not reading
> the
> >> >> > pixman
> >> >> > list.
> >> >>
> >> >> Could you send me those emails ?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I forwarded the big one from him and my response. The patches I have
> had
> >> > since then I believe address his concerns and preserve the 2-filter
> >> > convolution api, they are just bug fixes and some efficiency changes.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Also, check if you need to rebase the patches against current
> pixman
> >> >> >> and if so, maybe send the series again. It might stir up a
> >> >> >> discussion.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The patches applied to the newest version without any conflicts and
> >> >> > my
> >> >> > test
> >> >> > programs still work. I have resent them to the pixman mailing list.
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Great!
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I'm willing to review them in terms of correctness and code style,
> >> >> >> but
> >> >> >> I'm not veteran enough in pixman to give an opinion on the
> >> >> >> underlying
> >> >> >> changes (which is the most important issue).
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Anything would be great.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I believe these work well and have been using them for a while.
> This
> >> >> > would
> >> >> > allow the removal of redundant code in Cairo, and would allow
> 2-pass
> >> >> > filtering to be done at some point in the future, which would
> really
> >> >> > improve
> >> >> > pixman performance.
> >> >> >
> >> >> ok, I'll try to take a look next week or so.
> >> >>
> >> >> Oded
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hi Bill,
> >>
> >> I read most of the emails you sent me and I cleared time tomorrow to
> >> review your patches.
> >>
> >> Having said that, IMHO, I