On 29/08/07, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/29/07, Rob Church <robchur(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I think the point Mark was making was that a
wrapper around
ImageMagick is capable of doing all these things.
Definitely.
We don't have to integrate this at all.
True.
Picnic's solution is horrible and proprietary,
It's "proprietary", yes, and closed source at that. What's
"horrible"
about it, though? It's a lot nicer than the GUI we were just comparing
it to.
The fact that it's proprietary.
and not
something we want to commit ourselves to implement support
for,
Who is "we" and "ourselves"? If someone wrote an integration patch
for
it, would that be accepted into the mainline? Would it be enabled for
Wikipedia?
The lead developer has, I believe, previously commented on the issue,
and expressed an opinion that an open-source solution is far
preferable, so the answer is "probably not".
An integration patch for this almost certainly wouldn't be accepted
into the core software.
not least of
all because the MediaWiki community as a whole will
roundly reject it.
Why would they do that? Do we have a rule against integration with
proprietary software?
Because the community to which I am referring is one of those great
"open source" communities, which thrives on sharing techniques, code,
extensions - I'm talking about everyone else who uses MediaWiki,
excluding Wikimedia.
So, as before, our choices aren't really between
integrating with
Picnik or doing it ourselves, because the latter option is unlikely to
actually happen. The more feasible choice is between integrating with
Picnik or doing nothing at all, and having no online image
manipulation. Which do you think is preferable?
Which do *I* (and, if I may be so arrogant as to presume, a good many
others) find preferable? Rolling our own solution.
Rob Church