[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1963?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13923688#comment-13923688
]
John Hewson commented on PDFBOX-1963:
-------------------------------------
Maruan,
{quote}
John, there are others working on the lib and being dependent on a given
functionality. When an outside API changes that’s typically discussed before
and not simply committed. The fact that you can change it doesn’t mean that you
have to because you think that its better, easier for the user … - if there is
consensus to change it than it can be done,
{quote}
This was intended as a tiny change with limited impact. I have introduced
hundreds of breaking changes into PDFBox over the last few months, some merit
discussion others do not. In hindsight this change had a wider impact than I
had anticipated and would have merited a pre-commit discussion on JIRA or the
mailing list, but hindsight is always 20/20.
Your comment _"When an outside API changes that’s typically discussed before
and not simply committed"_ are not PDFBox's commit policy. As Andreas would say
"we are all adults" and can be trusted not to mess things up and to respond
swiftly, constructively, and politely to post-commit review by other developers
(as was and is being done in this JIRA issue right now). This is known as the
C-T-R, to learn more take a look at the [Apache Foundation
Glossary|http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html] under
"Commit-Then-Review". Your statement _"if there is consensus to change it
*then* it can be done"_ is also not PDFBox policy for the same reason, once
again please read up on C-T-R.
That's not to say that big changes shouldn't be discussed on JIRA or for really
big changes, the mailing list, of course they should be. As I said, I had
thought that this was an insignificant change but it turned out not to be,
sometimes these things happen, and we fix them when they do.
{quote}
I’m happy to think about and understand DPI. Which makes 2 people in this
thread „experts“. You’ve not proven that there are any complains from the
outside world that DPI is not being understood. So please revert that change.
If you need an additional method add that but keep the current.
{quote}
Tilman has since followed up his comment saying that originally he didn't
understand DPI and though that PDFBox could only render at a fixed DPI, so that
makes only 1 person in this thread. I've dealt with literally scores of
developers who don't get DPI but think they do, as we've seen it's not that
uncommon.
But the DPI debate doesn't matter, it's not constructive. It's just a
subjective "I like A" vs. "I like B" conversation which distracts us from
identifying what the underlying problem really is and evaluating the possible
solutions beyond what previously existed in the code and what I happened to
commit. You need to think of a commit as a starting-off point and not as
something immutable. Starting off with an idea an iterating on it is the
essence of writing good open source software and encouraging autonomy among
developers while ensuring that the group guides (and does not dictate) its
members to identifying and producing the best software they can.
> PDFImageWriter doesn't make use of PDFStreamEngine
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PDFBOX-1963
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1963
> Project: PDFBox
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Utilities
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0
> Reporter: John Hewson
> Assignee: John Hewson
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> PDFImageWriter is a subclass of PDFStreamEngine, however it never uses any of
> its functionality, the writeImage methods could be marked as static and
> behave in the same manner.
> The relationship between PDFImageWriter, RenderUtil, and ImageIOUtil no
> longer matches its historical origins and needs to be refactored.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
