Hi all, On Do 25 Apr 2013 18:41:40 CEST Ondřej Surý wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> wrote:On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:23:04AM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:Hi Bill and Debian Developers, My proposal is: A. Add libjpeg-turbo to Debian archive (that's easy) B. Add required provides/alternatives for libjpeg62-dev and libjpeg8-dev (where API/ABI match) C. Decide which package should provide default libjpeg-dev library1. https://bitbucket.org/libgd/gd-libgd/issue/50/tests-jpeg-jpeg_readc-fails-on-debian2. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-January/176299.html 3. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=602034As IJG libjpeg maintainer, my plan is to move to libjpeg9 which has more feature.I do not see libjpeg-turbo as a suitable replacement. It has 1) an different license. 2) much more security issues in a much smaller timeframe. 3) do not implement the full libjpeg8 ABI, nor the upcoming libjpeg9.Bill, sorry to barge in, but as a maintainer of the most prominent rev-deps of libjpeg (libgd2 & php5-gd), I would like to have some questions answered, and I cannot find the answer neither on http://www.ijg.org/ nor http://www.infai.org/jpeg/. 1. Who is behind IJG? Is it just Guido Vollbeding or there are more people? 2. What's the legal status of IJG? 3. What is the relation of IJG and InfAI (http://www.infai.org/jpeg/)? 4. Is there a (public) bug tracker? 5. Is there a source repository? 6. Is there a mailing list for libjpeg development/users? 7. How do I contribute code to IJG libjpeg? 8. There are new features incorporated to libjpeg? Is that a community process? Or how are the changes driven? IJG (and the features they implement in libjpeg) is independent from jpeg.org (the standards committee). 9. Is there a documentation for new features of libjpeg (DCT, SmartScale), so independent implementations can be done? 10. And what is JPEGClub (http://jpegclub.org/)? (Just found it in the comment rant under: http://blog.kaourantin.net/?p=116)
All questions are really good questions. Some of them have already been answered in the backlogs of #602034 [1] and the-merged-with bug #612341 [2].
Reading through both of them is probably a good idea for all who are interested in the complete story.
Esp. some statements from Guido Vollbeding [3] make me ask myself: hey, what kind of guy is that and what is the stand of the IJG in the free software ecosystem. His arguing tends to be somehow aggressive and inbalanced. One quote that shows what I mean (taken from [3]):
""" It seems that Bill Allombert is still one of the few sane people out there, many others have apparently gone mad. I don't care for the ignorant people. """@Bill: Unfortunately, I am not an expert with image processing, but most of what I have read in this thread speaks for re-thinking the current strategy of staying with libjpeg IJG.
Can this be a proposal? Package libjpeg and libjpeg-turbo using an alternatives setup and thus, making both libs installable in parallel. Packagers can then build-depend on one or the other libjpeg implementations.
Greets, Mike [1] http://bugs.debian.org/602034 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/612341 [3] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612341#116 -- DAS-NETZWERKTEAM mike gabriel, rothenstein 5, 24214 neudorf-bornstein fon: +49 (1520) 1976 148 GnuPG Key ID 0x25771B31 mail: mike.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de freeBusy: https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xfb
Attachment:
pgpUsRuZw46T1.pgp
Description: Digitale PGP-Unterschrift