Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 4:26 AM Tomáš Popela  wrote:
>
> Hi Neal,
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:15 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the EOL period is further out, but I'd rather make it so that the
>> next RHEL will have ImageMagick 7 right from the beginning.
>
>
> Just to be transparent: ImageMagick (or GraphicsMagick) won't be in RHEL 10 
> (or in any future version of RHEL). It might be in EPEL, but not in RHEL.
>

Sure. I can practically guarantee it'll be in EPEL because it's too
necessary to not have it.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Tomáš Popela]

Hi Neal,

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:15 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:

> Yes, the EOL period is further out, but I'd rather make it so that the
> next RHEL will have ImageMagick 7 right from the beginning.
>

Just to be transparent: ImageMagick (or GraphicsMagick) won't be in RHEL 10
(or in any future version of RHEL). It might be in EPEL, but not in RHEL.

Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Tue, 2022-12-06 at 11:22 -0500, PGNet Dev wrote:
> 
> > As I said earlier in the thread: of the 25 reverse dependencies of
> > the
> > ImageMagick libraries, only five don't build[1].
> > 
> > Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in
> > openSUSE[2],
> > but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
> > want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and
> > old
> > ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
> > expect this to be too difficult to do.
> 
> I understand this^^ is re: distro building/packaging
> 
> there's been at least one mention/question about run-time
> compatibility in this thread
> 
> I've not noticed mention previously, so just in case relevant here,
> fwiw
> 
> lsb_release -rd
> Description:    Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven)
> Release:    37
> 
> rpm -qa | grep -i magick | sort
> GraphicsMagick-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-c++-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-c++-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> GraphicsMagick-perl-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-c++-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-c++-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-libs-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick7-perl-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick-c++-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> ImageMagick-libs-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> php-pecl-imagick-im6-3.7.0-2.fc37.remi.8.2.x86_64
> 
> rpm -q --whatprovides `which convert`
> ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
> 
> 
> IM7 has been in-place for quite awhile here, installed from Remi's
> repos,
> 
> 
> https://blog.remirepo.net/post/2016/12/12/ImageMagick6-and-ImageMagic
> k7
> 
> https://www.howtofixthis.com/categories/installing-linux-tools/instal
> ling-imagemagick-from-remi-repository-or-via-source-code
> https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/how-to-install-imagemagick-7-
> on-fedora-35/20354
> 
> my machines certainly do not touch all packages with any IM deps.
> but, so far, I'm not aware of any complaint/error/etc re: that
> mix/use of *Magick pkgs on a bunch of similarly configured boxes.


TL;DR, but my proposal is almost bring a Remi copy of ImageMagick7 to
Fedora and EPEL. As Remi also based on Fedora and contribute to Fedora
/EPEL, so IMHO I can say is a "team" work . 






-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 11:30 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > While that is true, *I* don't like doing that if I don't have to. I'd
> > rather try to get things fixed upstream in tandem. Upstreams tend to
> > appreciate that in my experience. :)
>
> Sure, but it tends to be significantly more work. Upstreams need to support
> several platforms at once, so they often cannot just move to new libraries
> and drop support for the old ones, and some are also quite picky about code
> style issues that ultimately do not matter to end users.
>
> > (This is probably why so many people think I'm everywhere, to be honest!
> > :P )
>
> :-)
>
> > Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
> > but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
> > want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
> > ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
> > expect this to be too difficult to do.
>
> Well, that is exactly why it is harder to make a patch that is acceptable to
> upstream than one that works in the distribution. A downstream patch can
> even be conditionally applied, if you want to support old and new library
> versions in the same specfile, so the dual support need not be in the patch.
> This is of course not the case for an upstream patch. So then you end up not
> only adding "#ifdef"s for every line you changed, but also need to add a
> build system ("configure") check for the library version. It can turn a
> quick search job into a patch adding dozens of new lines of code.
>

I'll just say this: anything worth doing is worth doing well.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> While that is true, *I* don't like doing that if I don't have to. I'd
> rather try to get things fixed upstream in tandem. Upstreams tend to
> appreciate that in my experience. :)

Sure, but it tends to be significantly more work. Upstreams need to support 
several platforms at once, so they often cannot just move to new libraries 
and drop support for the old ones, and some are also quite picky about code 
style issues that ultimately do not matter to end users.

> (This is probably why so many people think I'm everywhere, to be honest!
> :P )

:-)
 
> Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
> but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
> want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
> ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
> expect this to be too difficult to do.

Well, that is exactly why it is harder to make a patch that is acceptable to 
upstream than one that works in the distribution. A downstream patch can 
even be conditionally applied, if you want to support old and new library 
versions in the same specfile, so the dual support need not be in the patch. 
This is of course not the case for an upstream patch. So then you end up not 
only adding "#ifdef"s for every line you changed, but also need to add a 
build system ("configure") check for the library version. It can turn a 
quick search job into a patch adding dozens of new lines of code.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[PGNet Dev]

As I said earlier in the thread: of the 25 reverse dependencies of the
ImageMagick libraries, only five don't build[1].

Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
expect this to be too difficult to do.


I understand this^^ is re: distro building/packaging

there's been at least one mention/question about run-time compatibility in this 
thread

I've not noticed mention previously, so just in case relevant here, fwiw

lsb_release -rd
Description:Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven)
Release:37

rpm -qa | grep -i magick | sort
GraphicsMagick-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-c++-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-c++-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-devel-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
GraphicsMagick-perl-1.3.38-3.fc37.x86_64
ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-c++-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-c++-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-devel-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-libs-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick7-perl-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick-c++-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
ImageMagick-libs-6.9.12.67-1.fc37.remi.x86_64
php-pecl-imagick-im6-3.7.0-2.fc37.remi.8.2.x86_64

rpm -q --whatprovides `which convert`
ImageMagick7-7.1.0.52-1.fc37.remi.x86_64


IM7 has been in-place for quite awhile here, installed from Remi's repos,

https://blog.remirepo.net/post/2016/12/12/ImageMagick6-and-ImageMagick7

https://www.howtofixthis.com/categories/installing-linux-tools/installing-imagemagick-from-remi-repository-or-via-source-code

https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/how-to-install-imagemagick-7-on-fedora-35/20354

my machines certainly do not touch all packages with any IM deps.
but, so far, I'm not aware of any complaint/error/etc re: that mix/use of 
*Magick pkgs on a bunch of similarly configured boxes.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:49 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > There are actually
> > other packages I could fix in Fedora with patches from openSUSE or
> > PLD, but they need more work to not break compatibility with building
> > with GraphicsMagick (which these packages in question support), so
> > using IM6 there for now is fine while that gets worked out.
>
> If there are patches, I do not see why we cannot just apply them downstream
> instead of building against a compat package, especially if we make
> ImageMagick 7 the default as you propose.
>
> There is no rule in Fedora that any and all patches must be upstreamed.
> Especially building against the distribution's version of a library is
> exactly what a distribution is for and hence the perfect example of when it
> makes sense to patch a package.
>

While that is true, *I* don't like doing that if I don't have to. I'd
rather try to get things fixed upstream in tandem. Upstreams tend to
appreciate that in my experience. :)

(This is probably why so many people think I'm everywhere, to be honest! :P )

> IMHO, either we go with Sergio's plan, letting ImageMagick be version 6
> forever and introducing ImageMagick7 (and in the future ImageMagick8, etc.)
> for all newer versions, then we can slowly switch packages from ImageMagick
> to ImageMagick7, or we go with your plan and move ImageMagick to version 7,
> but then we should do all we can to make really everything use the new
> version.
>

As I said earlier in the thread: of the 25 reverse dependencies of the
ImageMagick libraries, only five don't build[1].

Further analysis indicates that dvdauthor has a patch in openSUSE[2],
but the fix breaks support for GraphicsMagick as an alternative. I
want to rework that patch so it doesn't break GraphicsMagick and old
ImageMagick support so that it's suitable for upstreaming. I don't
expect this to be too difficult to do.

[1]: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/24CLLA46CAIKWRSPYVLZFLDPLTPRDU7U/
[2]: 
https://code.opensuse.org/package/dvdauthor/blob/master/f/dvdauthor-0.7.2-imagemagick7.patch


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:17 AM Michael Cronenworth  wrote:
>
> On 12/6/22 8:31 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > There's a very important difference between September 2017 and now: we
> > know someone else already did it!
>
> Great. Good luck.
>
> > As an aside: I don't appreciate the "high horse" comment, considering
> > during most of this discussion, I was doing the work and evaluating
> > things.
>
> It's unfortunate you feel this way. Maybe we cannot work together.
>

I don't think that's the case. The point I'm making is that I'm not
speaking from a point of arrogance, but trying to speak from the
ideals of what we're supposed to do, while simultaneously trying to
actually execute on that to demonstrate that I'm willing to help to
make it happen. Most of the complaints from Sergio and you seem to be
centered on doing it alone and taking on the entire workload
yourselves, but that is not a requirement at all. I spent a chunk of
my Sunday adapting the ImageMagick packaging, building an ImageMagick6
package, and rebuilding packages from Dist-Git in COPR against
ImageMagick 7 to figure out what the scope of things are.

I truly think that transitioning to ImageMagick 7 for the majority of
packages is a lot less difficult than it was back when it was tried in
2017. And dragging our feet on this isn't going to help anything.

The ImageMagick 6 website itself states the recommendation to move to
ImageMagick 7 now:

> As ImageMagick version 6 is no longer being evolved, we recommend you switch 
> to ImageMagick version 7. In the mean-time we continue to support and add 
> security patches, but not evolve, ImageMagick version 6, until at least 
> August 1, 2030.

Yes, the EOL period is further out, but I'd rather make it so that the
next RHEL will have ImageMagick 7 right from the beginning. And in
EPEL 9, there's one package that needs a patch to build against
ImageMagick 7 if we wanted to make that bump and ship the ImageMagick6
compat package there like I propose we do for Fedora.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> There are actually
> other packages I could fix in Fedora with patches from openSUSE or
> PLD, but they need more work to not break compatibility with building
> with GraphicsMagick (which these packages in question support), so
> using IM6 there for now is fine while that gets worked out.

If there are patches, I do not see why we cannot just apply them downstream 
instead of building against a compat package, especially if we make 
ImageMagick 7 the default as you propose.

There is no rule in Fedora that any and all patches must be upstreamed. 
Especially building against the distribution's version of a library is 
exactly what a distribution is for and hence the perfect example of when it 
makes sense to patch a package.

IMHO, either we go with Sergio's plan, letting ImageMagick be version 6 
forever and introducing ImageMagick7 (and in the future ImageMagick8, etc.) 
for all newer versions, then we can slowly switch packages from ImageMagick 
to ImageMagick7, or we go with your plan and move ImageMagick to version 7, 
but then we should do all we can to make really everything use the new 
version.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Michael Cronenworth]

On 12/6/22 8:31 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:

There's a very important difference between September 2017 and now: we
know someone else already did it!


Great. Good luck.


As an aside: I don't appreciate the "high horse" comment, considering
during most of this discussion, I was doing the work and evaluating
things.


It's unfortunate you feel this way. Maybe we cannot work together.

Take care.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 8:26 AM Michael Cronenworth  wrote:
>
> On 12/5/22 5:41 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > But in general, it looks like an upgrade to ImageMagick 7 will be
> > rather easy to do.
>
> Hi Neal,
>
> I appreciate your eagerness here, but it is a little misled.
>
> Version 7 is radically different than version 6. Most (I don't have an exact 
> figure)
> packages in Fedora are *only* compatible with version 6.
>
> Why do I know this? Check out the ImageMagick git history around September 
> 2017. :)
>

The Git history is not useful. It has no details of why. I've already
looked at it before.

> I think you need to back off the high horse here wanting version 7 as a 
> primary
> package and version 6 as a compat package, but I've relinquished my 
> ImageMagick
> duties as it takes too much time and energy, and Sergio is doing a great job 
> taking
> over.
>

There's a very important difference between September 2017 and now: we
know someone else already did it!

Two distributions have already transitioned from ImageMagick 6 to
ImageMagick 7 by default: PLD (December 2016) and openSUSE (March
2017). As a result of that, a number of packages have already been
made compatible with IM7 over the past five years. Incidentally, this
means ImageMagick 7 is part of SUSE Linux Enterprise 15.

When I went through and rebuilt things, most things *just worked*. I
had to do a very simple tweak to the ImageMagick package to make it
easier to make stuff that's compatible with both find the IM7 headers,
and all but 5 packages built. Only two packages needed patches to
introduce IM6/IM7 compatibility, and one of those isn't dead upstream.
I'll send the patch upstream for that package. There are actually
other packages I could fix in Fedora with patches from openSUSE or
PLD, but they need more work to not break compatibility with building
with GraphicsMagick (which these packages in question support), so
using IM6 there for now is fine while that gets worked out.

I only said we should do it because I know it works. Not doing it
propagates this problem of continuing to default to the legacy
version.

As an aside: I don't appreciate the "high horse" comment, considering
during most of this discussion, I was doing the work and evaluating
things.




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Michael Cronenworth]

On 12/5/22 5:41 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:

But in general, it looks like an upgrade to ImageMagick 7 will be
rather easy to do.


Hi Neal,

I appreciate your eagerness here, but it is a little misled.

Version 7 is radically different than version 6. Most (I don't have an exact figure) 
packages in Fedora are *only* compatible with version 6.


Why do I know this? Check out the ImageMagick git history around September 
2017. :)

I think you need to back off the high horse here wanting version 7 as a primary 
package and version 6 as a compat package, but I've relinquished my ImageMagick 
duties as it takes too much time and energy, and Sergio is doing a great job taking 
over.


Thanks,
Michael
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:57 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
 wrote:
>
> On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with
> > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7,
> > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
>
> I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to version
> 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
>
> --
> Sincerely,
>Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)

We've had just these issues with Java and python, and years ago with
perl and gcc upgrades. Do the "add a suffix" first, to make the new
version available for testing and debugging, because it's going to
break a *lot* of working code that uses tools like "convert". After
that's had a chance to sink in, then switch the default to be the new
ImageMagick 7 tools, and leave a previous version around as
ImageMagick 6.

The "compat-*" packages, such as the compat-gnutls I've worked with in
RHEL, have been useful for compilation of tools demanding current
versions of libraries, but are not helpful with such a large suite of
executable tools as ImageMagick.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 21:06 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 6:32 PM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > Final statement, instead of wasting my time and energy on
> > arguments,
> > Imagemagick7 could already be built on rawhide if someone had done
> > the
> > package review for me
> > 
> 
> 
> I understand the sentiment as another person who has donated 1000s of
> hours to packaging on Fedora, but the "default" package SHOULD be the
> current latest package. It' just part of "Fedora First". 

You are wrong , the default packaging for gtk was gtk+, gtk2 , gtk3,
gtk4 . For wxGTK was wxGTK, wxGTK3 . For Python was python , python3 ,
and you have much more examples that I can remember now 

The ImageMagick 6 series is officially supported until December of
2027.

ImageMagick was not maintained well since about 2018 , Redhat drop it
on el8 and was moved epel because in short and in my humble
interpretation,  gives much work to maintain and have many so bumps
 ( https://access.redhat.com/solutions/4437561  ) 


> So my vote (as much as it matters) is that all packages should be
> built with the latest version in COPR to verify compatibility, and
> the ones that don't, build with an ImageMagik 6 compat package. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Richard
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 6:38 PM Emmanuel Seyman  wrote:
>
> * Neal Gompa [04/12/2022 22:26] :
> >
> > Smooge challenged me earlier in this conversation to provide patches
> > and effort, and I'm doing just that.
>
> Thank you for doing this, btw.
>
> Over the weekend, this became a discussion where none of the
> participants seemed to be listening to the others and it became somewhat
> painful to read. It's nice to see something constructive come out of it.
>

Pretty much the entire time this thread was going on, I was doing some
legwork or actual work on it. It's rare that I'm totally an armchair
engineer about things. :)

Usually I have a lot of other things going on so I can't do as much as
I'd like. Alas, I don't get paid to work on Fedora. :P

But in general, it looks like an upgrade to ImageMagick 7 will be
rather easy to do.




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Emmanuel Seyman]

* Neal Gompa [04/12/2022 22:26] :
>
> Smooge challenged me earlier in this conversation to provide patches
> and effort, and I'm doing just that.

Thank you for doing this, btw.

Over the weekend, this became a discussion where none of the
participants seemed to be listening to the others and it became somewhat
painful to read. It's nice to see something constructive come out of it.

Emmanuel
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 03. 12. 22 v 17:25 Sérgio Basto napsal(a):

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:

On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:

The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
with
ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
7,
we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick

I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
version
7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.

Anyone is going to review the package or not ?



If you have provided ImageMagic6 as most of the people suggests, you 
wold not need review at all:


https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/


~~~

Contributors and reviewers MUST follow the Package Review Process 
, 
with the following exceptions:


* The package is being created so that multiple versions of the same 
package can coexist in the distribution (or coexist between EPEL and 
RHEL). The package MUST be properly named according to the naming 
guidelines 
 
and MUST NOT conflict with all other versions of the same package.


~~~


Vít


  
I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .


I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
minds ask .

And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.

ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
or I won't do it .

That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.






OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 04/12/2022 20:25, Sérgio Basto wrote:
I don't indent change /usr/bin/convert from ImageMagick6 so probably it 
will /usr/bin/convert-7


Such name change is not a good idea, because /usr/bin/convert and all 
other ImageMagick binaries are used in many scripts and SPECs. You must 
provide symbolic links to unversioned versions.


--
Sincerely,
  Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 10:06 PM Richard Shaw  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 6:32 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>>
>> Final statement, instead of wasting my time and energy on arguments,
>> Imagemagick7 could already be built on rawhide if someone had done the
>> package review for me
>
>
> I understand the sentiment as another person who has donated 1000s of hours 
> to packaging on Fedora, but the "default" package SHOULD be the current 
> latest package. It' just part of "Fedora First".
>
> So my vote (as much as it matters) is that all packages should be built with 
> the latest version in COPR to verify compatibility, and the ones that don't, 
> build with an ImageMagik 6 compat package.
>

I've got this mostly worked out now:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/ImageMagick7-dev/

There are five failures:

* autotrace - plan to notify upstream
* dvdauthor - point to GraphicsMagick or IM6, plan to notify upstream
* q - dead upstream, planned to point to IM6
* vdr-skinnopacity - current upstream dead, plan to notify new upstream
* vdr-tvguide - plan to notify upstream

I've got an IM6 compat package made (forked from current IM):
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/ImageMagick7-dev/build/5081492/



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 7:32 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 17:14 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 5:07 PM Sérgio Basto 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 14:33 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:39 AM Stephen Smoogen
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 11:55, Neal Gompa 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > > > > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a
> > > > > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > > package
> > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > > > > > > > > ImageMagick
> > > > > > > > > 7,
> > > > > > > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick
> > > > > > > > package
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > version
> > > > > > > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this
> > > > > > > thread .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your
> > > > > > > brilliants
> > > > > > > minds ask .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to
> > > > > > v7
> > > > > > and
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Patches please, Neal to help Sergio cut it down then. He is
> > > > > saying
> > > > > he needs that time to make it work for all the problems he is
> > > > > seeing. Your commentary and others are coming across as
> > > > > lambasting
> > > > > him when he is wanting help.  While your and other comments
> > > > > seem
> > > > > clear to you.. code would be clearer.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sure. I've prepared a pull request for ImageMagick itself:
> > > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ImageMagick/pull-request/10
> > > >
> > > > And I'm preparing a COPR to rebuild the reverse dependencies and
> > > > work
> > > > through the breakages (if any):
> > > > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/ImageMagick7-dev/
> > >
> > > I already state why I against this approach , don't forget, before
> > > merge this PR, you need do the compat-ImageMagick6912 or something,
> > > like [1]
> > >
> >
> > Sure, an ImageMagick6 package as a compatibility package is easy
> > enough to do.
> >
> > > And this will delay a lot adding ImageMagick7 to epel9 and epel8
> > >
> >
> > No, it wouldn't. You could upgrade ImageMagick and add the
> > ImageMagick6 compat package there too and be fully compliant without
> > extra effort.
>
> With a lot more of time , energy , attention you can, but if you think
> it won't break anything you are wrong and I don't want stresses,
> eventually in a second phase I would do the same as you propose.
>
> I don't understand what advantages it brings do a compat ImageMagick to
> do a new ImageMagick version.
>

There are four big advantages:

1. The newest version is default, which means as software comes in
and/or gets upgraded, it gets validated against ImageMagick 7.
2. Things that can't work with the newer version will be easily
explicitly marked as such, rather than implicitly so.
3. The ecosystem gets dragged forward as ImageMagick 7 is exposed as
the default to people.
4. It matches upstream intent (ImageMagick = IM7, ImageMagick6 = IM6)

> Final statement, instead of wasting my time and energy on arguments,
> Imagemagick7 could already be built on rawhide if someone had done the
> package review for me
>

For what it's worth, I am literally working through the dependency
chain of things that link to ImageMagick in Fedora and fixing things.
I've been doing it in between other tasks I'm working on today and
have mostly qualified everything in Fedora. I've been comparing notes
with PLD and openSUSE, who have both moved to ImageMagick 7 by default
years ago.

Smooge challenged me earlier in this conversation to provide patches
and effort, and I'm doing just that.

The two RPM Fusion reverse dependencies (OpenShot and xine-lib) can
move to Fedora now since all their dependencies are available in
Fedora proper (and EPEL 9), so I have popped both off the list to add
to the other list of things to move from RPM Fusion.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List 

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Richard Shaw]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 6:32 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:

> Final statement, instead of wasting my time and energy on arguments,
> Imagemagick7 could already be built on rawhide if someone had done the
> package review for me
>

I understand the sentiment as another person who has donated 1000s of hours
to packaging on Fedora, but the "default" package SHOULD be the current
latest package. It' just part of "Fedora First".

So my vote (as much as it matters) is that all packages should be built
with the latest version in COPR to verify compatibility, and the ones that
don't, build with an ImageMagik 6 compat package.

Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 17:14 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 5:07 PM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 14:33 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:39 AM Stephen Smoogen
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 11:55, Neal Gompa 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto
> > > > > 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > > > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a
> > > > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > package
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > > > > > > > ImageMagick
> > > > > > > > 7,
> > > > > > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick
> > > > > > > package
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > version
> > > > > > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this
> > > > > > thread .
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your
> > > > > > brilliants
> > > > > > minds ask .
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to
> > > > > v7
> > > > > and
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Patches please, Neal to help Sergio cut it down then. He is
> > > > saying
> > > > he needs that time to make it work for all the problems he is
> > > > seeing. Your commentary and others are coming across as
> > > > lambasting
> > > > him when he is wanting help.  While your and other comments
> > > > seem
> > > > clear to you.. code would be clearer.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Sure. I've prepared a pull request for ImageMagick itself:
> > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ImageMagick/pull-request/10
> > > 
> > > And I'm preparing a COPR to rebuild the reverse dependencies and
> > > work
> > > through the breakages (if any):
> > > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/ImageMagick7-dev/
> > 
> > I already state why I against this approach , don't forget, before
> > merge this PR, you need do the compat-ImageMagick6912 or something,
> > like [1]
> > 
> 
> Sure, an ImageMagick6 package as a compatibility package is easy
> enough to do.
> 
> > And this will delay a lot adding ImageMagick7 to epel9 and epel8
> > 
> 
> No, it wouldn't. You could upgrade ImageMagick and add the
> ImageMagick6 compat package there too and be fully compliant without
> extra effort.

With a lot more of time , energy , attention you can, but if you think
it won't break anything you are wrong and I don't want stresses,
eventually in a second phase I would do the same as you propose. 

I don't understand what advantages it brings do a compat ImageMagick to
do a new ImageMagick version. 

Final statement, instead of wasting my time and energy on arguments,
Imagemagick7 could already be built on rawhide if someone had done the
package review for me

Rest my case 

Best regards,
-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 4:35 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
 wrote:
>
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > You can filter out things that use ImageMagick as a build dependency
> > because that's just the command line utilities. That's why I checked
> > only the ones that use the libraries, where the API changes and the
> > required rebuilds are needed.
>
> How backwards-compatible is the CLI? Can there be things stopping to build
> or to work at runtime because ImageMagick 7 convert does not understand some
> option intended for ImageMagick 6 convert?
>

It's pretty compatible. Just by diffing "convert --help", it's mostly
functional additions and some reorganization/rewording of
descriptions.

The only option missing is "convert -magnify", though curiously the
code is still present in ImageMagick API. The command seems plumbed
into the program in the source code too, so I'm confused why it's not
documented.

I've attached the diff of the program help too.




--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--- convert6.txt2022-12-04 16:51:43.547765023 -0500
+++ convert7.txt2022-12-04 17:07:45.018411091 -0500
@@ -1,8 +1,9 @@
-Version: ImageMagick 6.9.12-67 Q16 x86_64 17519 https://legacy.imagemagick.org
+Version: ImageMagick 7.1.0-52 Q16-HDRI x86_64 20549 https://imagemagick.org
 Copyright: (C) 1999 ImageMagick Studio LLC
 License: https://imagemagick.org/script/license.php
-Features: Cipher DPC Modules OpenMP(4.5) 
-Delegates (built-in): bzlib cairo djvu fontconfig freetype gslib gvc jbig jng 
jp2 jpeg lcms lqr ltdl lzma openexr pangocairo png ps raqm raw rsvg tiff webp 
wmf x xml zlib
+Features: Cipher DPC HDRI Modules OpenMP(4.5)
+Delegates (built-in): bzlib cairo djvu fftw fontconfig freetype gslib gvc jbig 
jng jp2 jpeg jxl lcms lqr ltdl lzma openexr pangocairo png ps raqm raw rsvg 
tiff webp wmf x xml zip zlib
+Compiler: gcc (12.2)
 Usage: convert [options ...] file [ [options ...] file ...] [options ...] file
 
 Image Settings:
@@ -20,9 +21,9 @@ Image Settings:
   -blue-primary point  chromaticity blue primary point
   -bordercolor color   border color
   -caption string  assign a caption to an image
-  -channel typeapply option to select image channels
+  -clipclip along the first path from the 8BIM profile
   -clip-mask filename  associate a clip mask with the image
-  -colors valuepreferred number of colors in the image
+  -clip-path idclip along a named path from the 8BIM profile
   -colorspace type alternate image colorspace
   -comment string  annotate image with comment
   -compose operatorset image composite operator
@@ -39,6 +40,7 @@ Image Settings:
   -encoding type   text encoding type
   -endian type endianness (MSB or LSB) of the image
   -family name render text with this font family
+  -features distance   analyze image features (e.g. contrast, correlation)
   -fill color  color to use when filling a graphic primitive
   -filter type use this filter when resizing an image
   -font name   render text with this font
@@ -46,7 +48,8 @@ Image Settings:
   -fuzz distance   colors within this distance are considered equal
   -gravity typehorizontal and vertical text placement
   -green-primary point chromaticity green primary point
-  -intensity methodmethod to generate intensity value from pixel
+  -illuminant type reference illuminant
+  -intensity methodmethod to generate an intensity value from a pixel
   -intent type type of rendering intent when managing the image color
   -interlace type  type of image interlacing scheme
   -interline-spacing value
@@ -58,7 +61,6 @@ Image Settings:
   -label stringassign a label to an image
   -limit type valuepixel cache resource limit
   -loop iterations add Netscape loop extension to your GIF animation
-  -mask filename   associate a mask with the image
   -matte   store matte channel if the image has one
   -mattecolor colorframe color
   -moments report image moments
@@ -71,6 +73,7 @@ Image Settings:
   -preview typeimage preview type
   -quality value   JPEG/MIFF/PNG compression level
   -quiet   suppress all warning messages
+  -read-mask filename  associate a read mask with the image
   -red-primary point   chromaticity red primary point
   -regard-warnings pay attention to warning messages
   -remap filename  transform image colors to match this set of colors
@@ -102,6 +105,7 @@ Image Settings:
virtual pixel access method
   -weight type render text with this font weight
   -white-point point   chromaticity white point
+  -write-mask filename associate a write mask with the image  -word-break type 
sets whether line breaks appear wherever the text would otherwise overflow
 
 Image Operators:
   -adaptive-blur geometry
@@ -117,7 +121,11 @@ Image Operators:
   -auto-gamma  automagically adjust 

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 5:07 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 14:33 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:39 AM Stephen Smoogen 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 11:55, Neal Gompa  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new
> > > > > > > package
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > > > > > > ImageMagick
> > > > > > > 7,
> > > > > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > version
> > > > > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> > > > >
> > > > > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this
> > > > > thread .
> > > > >
> > > > > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your
> > > > > brilliants
> > > > > minds ask .
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to v7
> > > > and
> > >
> > >
> > > Patches please, Neal to help Sergio cut it down then. He is saying
> > > he needs that time to make it work for all the problems he is
> > > seeing. Your commentary and others are coming across as lambasting
> > > him when he is wanting help.  While your and other comments seem
> > > clear to you.. code would be clearer.
> > >
> >
> > Sure. I've prepared a pull request for ImageMagick itself:
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ImageMagick/pull-request/10
> >
> > And I'm preparing a COPR to rebuild the reverse dependencies and work
> > through the breakages (if any):
> > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/ImageMagick7-dev/
>
> I already state why I against this approach , don't forget, before
> merge this PR, you need do the compat-ImageMagick6912 or something,
> like [1]
>

Sure, an ImageMagick6 package as a compatibility package is easy enough to do.

> And this will delay a lot adding ImageMagick7 to epel9 and epel8
>

No, it wouldn't. You could upgrade ImageMagick and add the
ImageMagick6 compat package there too and be fully compliant without
extra effort.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 14:33 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:39 AM Stephen Smoogen 
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 11:55, Neal Gompa  wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new
> > > > > > package
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > > > > > ImageMagick
> > > > > > 7,
> > > > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package
> > > > > to
> > > > > version
> > > > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> > > > 
> > > > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> > > > 
> > > > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this
> > > > thread .
> > > > 
> > > > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your
> > > > brilliants
> > > > minds ask .
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to v7
> > > and
> > 
> > 
> > Patches please, Neal to help Sergio cut it down then. He is saying
> > he needs that time to make it work for all the problems he is
> > seeing. Your commentary and others are coming across as lambasting
> > him when he is wanting help.  While your and other comments seem
> > clear to you.. code would be clearer.
> > 
> 
> Sure. I've prepared a pull request for ImageMagick itself:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ImageMagick/pull-request/10
> 
> And I'm preparing a COPR to rebuild the reverse dependencies and work
> through the breakages (if any):
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/ImageMagick7-dev/

I already state why I against this approach , don't forget, before
merge this PR, you need do the compat-ImageMagick6912 or something,
like [1]

And this will delay a lot adding ImageMagick7 to epel9 and epel8  

Best regards, 

[1]
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-1362e7988d
-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> You can filter out things that use ImageMagick as a build dependency
> because that's just the command line utilities. That's why I checked
> only the ones that use the libraries, where the API changes and the
> required rebuilds are needed.

How backwards-compatible is the CLI? Can there be things stopping to build 
or to work at runtime because ImageMagick 7 convert does not understand some 
option intended for ImageMagick 6 convert?

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:39 AM Stephen Smoogen  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 11:55, Neal Gompa  wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>> > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>> > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
>> > > > with
>> > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
>> > > > 7,
>> > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
>> > >
>> > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
>> > > version
>> > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
>> >
>> > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
>> >
>> > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .
>> >
>> > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
>> > minds ask .
>> >
>>
>> Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to v7 and
>
>
> Patches please, Neal to help Sergio cut it down then. He is saying he needs 
> that time to make it work for all the problems he is seeing. Your commentary 
> and others are coming across as lambasting him when he is wanting help.  
> While your and other comments seem clear to you.. code would be clearer.
>

Sure. I've prepared a pull request for ImageMagick itself:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ImageMagick/pull-request/10

And I'm preparing a COPR to rebuild the reverse dependencies and work
through the breakages (if any):
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/ImageMagick7-dev/



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 2:21 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:35 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new
> > > > > package
> > > > > with
> > > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > > > > ImageMagick
> > > > > 7,
> > > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > > >
> > > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> > > > version
> > > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> > >
> > > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> > >
> > > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread
> > > .
> > >
> > > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your
> > > brilliants
> > > minds ask .
> > >
> >
> > Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to v7 and
> > splitting out a compat package is an hour at best. Then, any package
> > that fails to rebuild to IM7 needs to be checked if it can be easily
> > fixed or needs to be switched to the IM6 compat package. If it fails
> > to build with IM7, check openSUSE (who *already did this*) and see if
> > the package has a patch there to fix the build. If they don't, switch
> > it to the IM6 compat package and go onto the next one.
> >
> > > And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
> > > have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package
> > > and
> > > wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a
> > > chaos ,
> > > and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
> > >
> > > ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03
> > > so
> > > after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
> > > ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way
> > > ,
> > > or I won't do it .
> > >
> > > That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and
> > > not
> > > the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim
> > > it.
> > >
> >
> > Have you considered that nobody has ever asked before for help? I
> > certainly haven't been asked.
> >
> > ngompa@fedora ~> sudo dnf --disablerepo="*updates*" repoquery
> > --whatrequires ImageMagick-c++ --qf "%{SOURCERPM}: %{REPOID}"
> > Last metadata expiration check: 0:54:24 ago on Sat 03 Dec 2022
> > 10:39:27 AM EST.
> > ImageMagick-6.9.12.64-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > R-magick-2.7.3-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > converseen-0.9.9.8-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > digikam-7.8.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > inkscape-1.2.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > kxstitch-2.1.1-8.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > libopenshot-0.2.7-8.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
> > pdfmixtool-1.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > pfstools-2.2.0-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > pstoedit-3.78-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > synfig-1.5.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > synfigstudio-1.5.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > vdr-scraper2vdr-1.0.12-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > vdr-skinnopacity-1.1.12-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > vdr-tvguide-1.3.6-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> >
> > ngompa@fedora ~> sudo dnf --disablerepo="*updates*" repoquery
> > --whatrequires ImageMagick-libs --qf "%{SOURCERPM}: %{REPOID}"
> > Last metadata expiration check: 0:54:32 ago on Sat 03 Dec 2022
> > 10:39:27 AM EST.
> > ImageMagick-6.9.12.64-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > R-magick-2.7.3-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > WindowMaker-0.95.9-9.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > autotrace-0.31.9-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > chafa-1.10.3-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > converseen-0.9.9.8-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > digikam-7.8.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > dmtx-utils-0.7.6-11.fc37.1.src.rpm: fedora
> > dvdauthor-0.7.2-18.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > eom-1.26.0-7.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > libopenshot-0.2.7-8.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
> > php-pecl-imagick-3.7.0-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > psiconv-0.9.8-38.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > pstoedit-3.78-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > q-7.11-46.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > rss-glx-0.9.1.p-53.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > rubygem-rmagick-4.3.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > synfig-1.5.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > synfigstudio-1.5.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > vips-8.12.2-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> > xine-lib-1.2.12-7.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
> >
> > Hardly 200 packages
>
> 186 packages to check
> Depending on: ImageMagick (186), status change: 2022-02-21 (40 weeks
> ago)
> BlockOutII (maintained by: jwrdegoede)
> BlockOutII-2.5-21.fc37.src requires ImageMagick = 1:6.9.12.67-1.fc38
>
> CImg (maintained by: berrange, cheese, cicku)
> CImg-1:3.1.6-1.fc38.src requires ImageMagick-c++-devel = 1:6.9.12.67-
> 1.fc38
>
> COPASI (maintained by: neuro-sig, sagitter)
> COPASI-4.37.264-1.fc38.src requires ImageMagick = 1:6.9.12.67-1.fc38
>
> GoldenCheetah (maintained by: martinkg)
> GoldenCheetah-1:3.6-0.21.RC2.fc38.src requires ImageMagick =
> 

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 17:41 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:38 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:34 AM Kalev Lember
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:26 PM Sérgio Basto 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > wrote:
> > >> > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > >> > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new
> > package
> > >> > > with
> > >> > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > ImageMagick
> > >> > > 7,
> > >> > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > >> >
> > >> > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package
> > to
> > >> > version
> > >> > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> > >>
> > >> Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> > >>
> > >> I already explain the situation in the other emails on this
> > thread .
> > >>
> > >> I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your
> > brilliants
> > >> minds ask .
> > >>
> > >> And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe
> > don't
> > >> have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package
> > and
> > >> wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a
> > chaos ,
> > >> and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
> > >>
> > >> ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-
> > 12-03 so
> > >> after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
> > >> ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my
> > way ,
> > >> or I won't do it .
> > >>
> > >> That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all 
> > and not
> > >> the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just
> > claim it.
> > >
> > >
> > > I think it makes sense to do it the way Sergio is planning as it
> > makes it all much much easier. I don't think we should set a too
> > high bar here wrt the package naming; anything is an improvement if
> > we can start getting the distro migrating to ImageMagick 7.
> > >
> > > We can always rename ImageMagick -> ImageMagick6 and ImageMagick7
> > -> ImageMagick at a later date when someone has the energy to do
> > it.
> > >
> > > Don't let perfect be the enemy of good :)
> > >
> > 
> > It matters in this case because both packages provide stuff in
> > /usr/bin, and we only should have one provider of those.
> > ImageMagick
> > should retain them, and the ImageMagick6 compat package should only
> > provide libraries for stuff that can't link to the IM7 libraries.
> > 
> 
> 
> Ah, yes, that's a good point. I think we have a bunch of packages
> that 'BuildRequires: ImageMagick' and then use /usr/bin/convert
> during the build to convert icons from one format to another. Other
> packages require /usr/bin/convert for runtime use.
> 
> Sergio, what's your plan for handling /usr/bin/convert?


Thank you Kalev , 

I don't indent change /usr/bin/convert from ImageMagick6 so probably it
will /usr/bin/convert-7 

Note that I checked Remi package and copied some ideas from there, so
also should check how Remi handle this . 

> -- 
> Kalev
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:35 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new
> > > > package
> > > > with
> > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > > > ImageMagick
> > > > 7,
> > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > > 
> > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> > > version
> > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> > 
> > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> > 
> > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread
> > .
> > 
> > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your
> > brilliants
> > minds ask .
> > 
> 
> Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to v7 and
> splitting out a compat package is an hour at best. Then, any package
> that fails to rebuild to IM7 needs to be checked if it can be easily
> fixed or needs to be switched to the IM6 compat package. If it fails
> to build with IM7, check openSUSE (who *already did this*) and see if
> the package has a patch there to fix the build. If they don't, switch
> it to the IM6 compat package and go onto the next one.
> 
> > And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
> > have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package
> > and
> > wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a
> > chaos ,
> > and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
> > 
> > ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03
> > so
> > after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
> > ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way
> > ,
> > or I won't do it .
> > 
> > That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and
> > not
> > the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim
> > it.
> > 
> 
> Have you considered that nobody has ever asked before for help? I
> certainly haven't been asked.
> 
> ngompa@fedora ~> sudo dnf --disablerepo="*updates*" repoquery
> --whatrequires ImageMagick-c++ --qf "%{SOURCERPM}: %{REPOID}"
> Last metadata expiration check: 0:54:24 ago on Sat 03 Dec 2022
> 10:39:27 AM EST.
> ImageMagick-6.9.12.64-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> R-magick-2.7.3-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> converseen-0.9.9.8-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> digikam-7.8.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> inkscape-1.2.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> kxstitch-2.1.1-8.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> libopenshot-0.2.7-8.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
> pdfmixtool-1.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> pfstools-2.2.0-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> pstoedit-3.78-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> synfig-1.5.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> synfigstudio-1.5.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> vdr-scraper2vdr-1.0.12-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> vdr-skinnopacity-1.1.12-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> vdr-tvguide-1.3.6-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> 
> ngompa@fedora ~> sudo dnf --disablerepo="*updates*" repoquery
> --whatrequires ImageMagick-libs --qf "%{SOURCERPM}: %{REPOID}"
> Last metadata expiration check: 0:54:32 ago on Sat 03 Dec 2022
> 10:39:27 AM EST.
> ImageMagick-6.9.12.64-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> R-magick-2.7.3-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> WindowMaker-0.95.9-9.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> autotrace-0.31.9-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> chafa-1.10.3-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> converseen-0.9.9.8-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> digikam-7.8.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> dmtx-utils-0.7.6-11.fc37.1.src.rpm: fedora
> dvdauthor-0.7.2-18.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> eom-1.26.0-7.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> libopenshot-0.2.7-8.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
> php-pecl-imagick-3.7.0-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> psiconv-0.9.8-38.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> pstoedit-3.78-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> q-7.11-46.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> rss-glx-0.9.1.p-53.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> rubygem-rmagick-4.3.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> synfig-1.5.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> synfigstudio-1.5.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> vips-8.12.2-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
> xine-lib-1.2.12-7.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
> 
> Hardly 200 packages

186 packages to check 
Depending on: ImageMagick (186), status change: 2022-02-21 (40 weeks
ago)
BlockOutII (maintained by: jwrdegoede)
BlockOutII-2.5-21.fc37.src requires ImageMagick = 1:6.9.12.67-1.fc38

CImg (maintained by: berrange, cheese, cicku)
CImg-1:3.1.6-1.fc38.src requires ImageMagick-c++-devel = 1:6.9.12.67-
1.fc38

COPASI (maintained by: neuro-sig, sagitter)
COPASI-4.37.264-1.fc38.src requires ImageMagick = 1:6.9.12.67-1.fc38

GoldenCheetah (maintained by: martinkg)
GoldenCheetah-1:3.6-0.21.RC2.fc38.src requires ImageMagick =
1:6.9.12.67-1.fc38

LaTeXML (maintained by: epel-packagers-sig, mikep)
LaTeXML-0.8.6-5.fc37.noarch requires perl(Image::Magick)

NsCDE (maintained by: dcavalca, salimma)
NsCDE-2.1-2.fc37.src requires ImageMagick = 1:6.9.12.67-1.fc38
NsCDE-2.1-2.fc37.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 11:55, Neal Gompa  wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > > > with
> > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > > > 7,
> > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > >
> > > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> > > version
> > > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> >
> > Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> >
> > I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .
> >
> > I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
> > minds ask .
> >
>
> Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to v7 and
>

Patches please, Neal to help Sergio cut it down then. He is saying he needs
that time to make it work for all the problems he is seeing. Your
commentary and others are coming across as lambasting him when he is
wanting help.  While your and other comments seem clear to you.. code would
be clearer.



-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Kalev Lember]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:38 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:34 AM Kalev Lember 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:26 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> >> > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >> > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> >> > > with
> >> > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> >> > > 7,
> >> > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> >> >
> >> > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> >> > version
> >> > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
> >>
> >> Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
> >>
> >> I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .
> >>
> >> I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
> >> minds ask .
> >>
> >> And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
> >> have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
> >> wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
> >> and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
> >>
> >> ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
> >> after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
> >> ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
> >> or I won't do it .
> >>
> >> That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
> >> the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.
> >
> >
> > I think it makes sense to do it the way Sergio is planning as it makes
> it all much much easier. I don't think we should set a too high bar here
> wrt the package naming; anything is an improvement if we can start getting
> the distro migrating to ImageMagick 7.
> >
> > We can always rename ImageMagick -> ImageMagick6 and ImageMagick7 ->
> ImageMagick at a later date when someone has the energy to do it.
> >
> > Don't let perfect be the enemy of good :)
> >
>
> It matters in this case because both packages provide stuff in
> /usr/bin, and we only should have one provider of those. ImageMagick
> should retain them, and the ImageMagick6 compat package should only
> provide libraries for stuff that can't link to the IM7 libraries.
>

Ah, yes, that's a good point. I think we have a bunch of packages that
'BuildRequires: ImageMagick' and then use /usr/bin/convert during the build
to convert icons from one format to another. Other packages require
/usr/bin/convert for runtime use.

Sergio, what's your plan for handling /usr/bin/convert?

-- 
Kalev
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:34 AM Kalev Lember  wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:26 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>> > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>> > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
>> > > with
>> > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
>> > > 7,
>> > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
>> >
>> > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
>> > version
>> > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
>>
>> Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
>>
>> I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .
>>
>> I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
>> minds ask .
>>
>> And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
>> have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
>> wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
>> and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
>>
>> ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
>> after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
>> ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
>> or I won't do it .
>>
>> That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
>> the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.
>
>
> I think it makes sense to do it the way Sergio is planning as it makes it all 
> much much easier. I don't think we should set a too high bar here wrt the 
> package naming; anything is an improvement if we can start getting the distro 
> migrating to ImageMagick 7.
>
> We can always rename ImageMagick -> ImageMagick6 and ImageMagick7 -> 
> ImageMagick at a later date when someone has the energy to do it.
>
> Don't let perfect be the enemy of good :)
>

It matters in this case because both packages provide stuff in
/usr/bin, and we only should have one provider of those. ImageMagick
should retain them, and the ImageMagick6 compat package should only
provide libraries for stuff that can't link to the IM7 libraries.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > > with
> > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > > 7,
> > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> >
> > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> > version
> > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
>
> Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
>
> I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .
>
> I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
> minds ask .
>

Really? "200 hours"? Not a chance. Upgrading ImageMagick to v7 and
splitting out a compat package is an hour at best. Then, any package
that fails to rebuild to IM7 needs to be checked if it can be easily
fixed or needs to be switched to the IM6 compat package. If it fails
to build with IM7, check openSUSE (who *already did this*) and see if
the package has a patch there to fix the build. If they don't, switch
it to the IM6 compat package and go onto the next one.

> And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
> have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
> wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
> and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
>
> ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
> after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
> ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
> or I won't do it .
>
> That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
> the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.
>

Have you considered that nobody has ever asked before for help? I
certainly haven't been asked.

ngompa@fedora ~> sudo dnf --disablerepo="*updates*" repoquery
--whatrequires ImageMagick-c++ --qf "%{SOURCERPM}: %{REPOID}"
Last metadata expiration check: 0:54:24 ago on Sat 03 Dec 2022 10:39:27 AM EST.
ImageMagick-6.9.12.64-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
R-magick-2.7.3-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
converseen-0.9.9.8-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
digikam-7.8.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
inkscape-1.2.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
kxstitch-2.1.1-8.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
libopenshot-0.2.7-8.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
pdfmixtool-1.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
pfstools-2.2.0-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
pstoedit-3.78-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
synfig-1.5.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
synfigstudio-1.5.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
vdr-scraper2vdr-1.0.12-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
vdr-skinnopacity-1.1.12-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
vdr-tvguide-1.3.6-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora

ngompa@fedora ~> sudo dnf --disablerepo="*updates*" repoquery
--whatrequires ImageMagick-libs --qf "%{SOURCERPM}: %{REPOID}"
Last metadata expiration check: 0:54:32 ago on Sat 03 Dec 2022 10:39:27 AM EST.
ImageMagick-6.9.12.64-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
R-magick-2.7.3-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
WindowMaker-0.95.9-9.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
autotrace-0.31.9-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
chafa-1.10.3-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
converseen-0.9.9.8-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
digikam-7.8.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
dmtx-utils-0.7.6-11.fc37.1.src.rpm: fedora
dvdauthor-0.7.2-18.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
eom-1.26.0-7.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
libopenshot-0.2.7-8.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free
php-pecl-imagick-3.7.0-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
psiconv-0.9.8-38.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
pstoedit-3.78-5.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
q-7.11-46.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
rss-glx-0.9.1.p-53.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
rubygem-rmagick-4.3.0-1.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
synfig-1.5.1-3.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
synfigstudio-1.5.1-2.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
vips-8.12.2-4.fc37.src.rpm: fedora
xine-lib-1.2.12-7.fc37.src.rpm: rpmfusion-free

Hardly 200 packages.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Fabio Valentini]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022, 17:26 Sérgio Basto  wrote:

> On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > > with
> > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > > 7,
> > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> >
> > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> > version
> > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
>
> Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
>
> I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .
>
> I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
> minds ask .
>
> And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
> have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
> wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
> and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
>
> ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
> after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
> ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
> or I won't do it .
>
> That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
> the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.
>


Note that the packaging guidelines don't actually specify that the
"unversioned" package name must be for the "latest" version. So using
ImageMagick for version 6 and ImageMagick7 for version 7 is fine from
Packaging Guidelines point of view.

Fabio


>
>
>
> --
> Sérgio M. B.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Kalev Lember]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 5:26 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:

> On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > > with
> > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > > 7,
> > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> >
> > I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> > version
> > 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.
>
> Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
>
> I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .
>
> I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
> minds ask .
>
> And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
> have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
> wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
> and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it.
>
> ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
> after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any
> ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
> or I won't do it .
>
> That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
> the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.
>

I think it makes sense to do it the way Sergio is planning as it makes it
all much much easier. I don't think we should set a too high bar here wrt
the package naming; anything is an improvement if we can start getting the
distro migrating to ImageMagick 7.

We can always rename ImageMagick -> ImageMagick6 and ImageMagick7 ->
ImageMagick at a later date when someone has the energy to do it.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good :)

-- 
Kalev
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 11:57 +0100, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > with
> > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > 7,
> > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> 
> I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to
> version 
> 7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.

Anyone is going to review the package or not ?
 
I already explain the situation in the other emails on this thread .

I estimate that I will need about 200 hours to do what your brilliants
minds ask .

And btw, asking to the others to have the work that you maybe don't
have in your packages , is very easy. if I do the compat package and
wait for 200 packages dependency adapt to the change, will be a chaos ,
and I don't like ignore all the tickets opened around it. 

ImageMagick-7.0.1-10 was release on 2016-06-07, today is 2022-12-03 so
after 6 Years and 5 Months and 26 Days, we still haven't  any 
ImageMagick 7 in Fedora or EL, so or you help me on do it in my way ,
or I won't do it . 

That is why package guidelines should be a guide and not all  and not
the all truth rule, when in practice you don't follow it just claim it.




-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 03/12/2022 00:30, Sérgio Basto wrote:

The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with
ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7,
we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick


I think it would be better to update the ImageMagick package to version 
7 and create a compatibility package ImageMagick6.


--
Sincerely,
  Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 00:12 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 11:55 PM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 22:41 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it
> > > > should
> > > > have been done a long time ago .
> > > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new
> > > > package
> > > > with
> > > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only
> > > > ImageMagick
> > > > 7,
> > > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > > > 
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Wouldn't the correct way to handle this be to create an
> > > > ImageMagick6 compat package and update the main package to
> > > > version
> > > > 7?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > In this case, I don't think is a good idea, mainly because will
> > > > give a lot more work and even so could break things, I think we
> > > > not
> > > > want change ImageMagick name, specially in epel 8 and 9, like
> > > > for
> > > > example python and python3 case, maybe for epel 10 we could
> > > > have
> > > > ImageMagick6 compat , IMO.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > But that change has to happen *somewhere*. Fedora is it. If you
> > > don't
> > > do it now, then we'll *never* get to do it.
> > > 
> > > And one of the purposes of Fedora is to be "First" and do
> > > "Features".
> > > Make a Fedora Linux 38 Change to do it if you must.
> > > 
> > > But the approach you're going for is not good, because it doesn't
> > > drive us to move things forward. There's usually only a drive to
> > > upgrade when someone creates a forcing function for it.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sometimes forcing moving forward can be a huge mistake, IMO.
> > In this case we also want bring IM-7 to epel(s) quickly. After
> > things
> > are stabilized, we may think in "forcing" ImageMagick-7.
> > 
> 
> No, we don't. We want to only bring things to EPEL once they're good
> in Fedora.

and ImageMagick-7 isn't good for epel ? what is the point here ? 

> 
> > BTW we already try upgrade to Imagemagick-7 in Fedora 26 / 27 and
> > didn't went well
> > 
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?search=ImageMagick=F27=F26
> > 
> 
> That was not done properly. It wasn't done as a proper upgrade in
> Rawhide. There was no effort done to reconcile all the reverse
> dependencies, and there was no announcement of the soname bump. That
> was why it was reverted.
> 
> Once it's good and done in Fedora, we can also announce an upgrade
> for
> EPEL and introduce a compat package for IM6 at the same time. Those
> kinds of
> things are not a problem to do there if well-coordinated with the
> EPEL
> Steering Committee.


As I'm trying explain, ImageMagick is not a package with few
dependencies, we have php, perl extensions etc for example and what you
are proposing will break in a lot of places including third-party repos
and I won't have time to respond it in time , we need a more smooth
transaction (IMO) .



> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 11:55 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 22:41 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it
> > > should
> > > have been done a long time ago .
> > > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > > with
> > > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > > 7,
> > > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206
> > >
> > >
> > > Wouldn't the correct way to handle this be to create an
> > > ImageMagick6 compat package and update the main package to version
> > > 7?
> > >
> > >
> > > In this case, I don't think is a good idea, mainly because will
> > > give a lot more work and even so could break things, I think we not
> > > want change ImageMagick name, specially in epel 8 and 9, like for
> > > example python and python3 case, maybe for epel 10 we could have
> > > ImageMagick6 compat , IMO.
> > >
> >
> > But that change has to happen *somewhere*. Fedora is it. If you don't
> > do it now, then we'll *never* get to do it.
> >
> > And one of the purposes of Fedora is to be "First" and do "Features".
> > Make a Fedora Linux 38 Change to do it if you must.
> >
> > But the approach you're going for is not good, because it doesn't
> > drive us to move things forward. There's usually only a drive to
> > upgrade when someone creates a forcing function for it.
> >
>
> Sometimes forcing moving forward can be a huge mistake, IMO.
> In this case we also want bring IM-7 to epel(s) quickly. After things
> are stabilized, we may think in "forcing" ImageMagick-7.
>

No, we don't. We want to only bring things to EPEL once they're good in Fedora.

> BTW we already try upgrade to Imagemagick-7 in Fedora 26 / 27 and
> didn't went well
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?search=ImageMagick=F27=F26
>

That was not done properly. It wasn't done as a proper upgrade in
Rawhide. There was no effort done to reconcile all the reverse
dependencies, and there was no announcement of the soname bump. That
was why it was reverted.

Once it's good and done in Fedora, we can also announce an upgrade for
EPEL and introduce a compat package for IM6 at the same time. Those kinds of
things are not a problem to do there if well-coordinated with the EPEL
Steering Committee.







--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 22:41 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it
> > should
> > have been done a long time ago .
> > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > with
> > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > 7,
> > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > 
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206
> > 
> > 
> > Wouldn't the correct way to handle this be to create an
> > ImageMagick6 compat package and update the main package to version
> > 7?
> > 
> > 
> > In this case, I don't think is a good idea, mainly because will
> > give a lot more work and even so could break things, I think we not
> > want change ImageMagick name, specially in epel 8 and 9, like for
> > example python and python3 case, maybe for epel 10 we could have
> > ImageMagick6 compat , IMO.
> > 
> 
> But that change has to happen *somewhere*. Fedora is it. If you don't
> do it now, then we'll *never* get to do it.
> 
> And one of the purposes of Fedora is to be "First" and do "Features".
> Make a Fedora Linux 38 Change to do it if you must.
> 
> But the approach you're going for is not good, because it doesn't
> drive us to move things forward. There's usually only a drive to
> upgrade when someone creates a forcing function for it.
> 

Sometimes forcing moving forward can be a huge mistake, IMO.
In this case we also want bring IM-7 to epel(s) quickly. After things
are stabilized, we may think in "forcing" ImageMagick-7.

BTW we already try upgrade to Imagemagick-7 in Fedora 26 / 27 and
didn't went well 

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?search=ImageMagick=F27=F26
 

> 
> -- 
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 10:29 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should
> have been done a long time ago .
> The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with
> ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7,
> we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206
>
>
> Wouldn't the correct way to handle this be to create an ImageMagick6 compat 
> package and update the main package to version 7?
>
>
> In this case, I don't think is a good idea, mainly because will give a lot 
> more work and even so could break things, I think we not want change 
> ImageMagick name, specially in epel 8 and 9, like for example python and 
> python3 case, maybe for epel 10 we could have ImageMagick6 compat , IMO.
>

But that change has to happen *somewhere*. Fedora is it. If you don't
do it now, then we'll *never* get to do it.

And one of the purposes of Fedora is to be "First" and do "Features".
Make a Fedora Linux 38 Change to do it if you must.

But the approach you're going for is not good, because it doesn't
drive us to move things forward. There's usually only a drive to
upgrade when someone creates a forcing function for it.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:34 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto 
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it
> > should
> > have been done a long time ago .
> > The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package
> > with
> > ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick
> > 7,
> > we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
> > 
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206
> > 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't the correct way to handle this be to create an ImageMagick6
> compat package and update the main package to version 7?

In this case, I don't think is a good idea, mainly because will give a
lot more work and even so could break things, I think we
not want change ImageMagick name, specially in epel 8 and 9, like for
example python and python3 case, maybe for epel 10 we could have
ImageMagick6 compat , IMO. 



> Thanks,
> Richard 
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 6:35 PM Richard Shaw  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should
>> have been done a long time ago .
>> The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with
>> ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7,
>> we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206
>
>
> Wouldn't the correct way to handle this be to create an ImageMagick6 compat 
> package and update the main package to version 7?
>

Yes, that's the correct way to do it.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Richard Shaw]

On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should
> have been done a long time ago .
> The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with
> ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7,
> we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206


Wouldn't the correct way to handle this be to create an ImageMagick6 compat
package and update the main package to version 7?

Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Review Request: ImageMagick7

[Sérgio Basto]

Hi,

I think it's important to bring ImageMagick 7 to Fedora, and it should
have been done a long time ago .
The proposal now is to keep ImageMagick 6 and make a new package with
ImageMagick 7 , when we have all applications use only ImageMagick 7,
we move the sources from ImageMagick7 to ImageMagick

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150206

Please help me to review it 

Thank you, 
-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue