semi-review; any chance of tests?
parent
4dd55b984f
commit
f36514d27f
|
@ -25,3 +25,21 @@ should be safe for inclusion.
|
|||
> meantime, i noticed that the desired effect doesn't happen when no explicit
|
||||
> size is set. as scalable graphics don't necessarily have a natural size
|
||||
> anyway, i don't consider that a showstopper. --[[chrysn]]
|
||||
|
||||
>> This all looks good in principle, but I would like to do a more detailed
|
||||
>> review, and test it with "real ImageMagick" in case its behaviour differs
|
||||
>> from GraphicsMagick.
|
||||
>>
|
||||
>> An automated regression test for the desired behaviour in `t/` would
|
||||
>> be great. There are SVGs and PNGs in the docwiki already; there are no
|
||||
>> JPEGs or PDFs, but perhaps you could add a trivially small example
|
||||
>> of each to `t/`? Imitating `t/tag.t` or `t/trail.t`, and skipping the
|
||||
>> test if the required modules are missing like `t/podcast.t` does,
|
||||
>> seems like it would work best.
|
||||
>>
|
||||
>> I agree that everything not in an interoperable web format should be
|
||||
>> converted to PNG when it's scaled down, but yes, that's more likely
|
||||
>> to be a breaking change, so it seems best to do that as a separate
|
||||
>> branch. In practice I think this means JPEG -> JPEG and everything
|
||||
>> else -> PNG, since JPEG is commonly used for photos and photo-like
|
||||
>> images that don't compress well under lossless compression. --[[smcv]]
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue