https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17645
--- Comment #24 from Tim Starling <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #19) > Since when does a single programmer get to set policy for the entirety of > Wikimedia? Since before it was called Wikimedia. That's not to say it's a good decision-making system. I'm happy to hear other opinions or for others to submit patches in this area. > Progressive JPEGs are going to be uploaded whether you want them to be or > not. It's not ideal to have bots convert them. I would prefer it if they were rejected on upload. > And don't say you haven't changed policy. You put a demand on all Wikimedia > users that they do a certain thing a certain way, even though the other way > works. That's a policy change. It's even listed at the Commons Help:JPEG. Sure, changing policy is a hack, in the absence of a feature which would reject these files on upload. If they were rejected on upload, then we could set a threshold based on available server memory, instead of having bot authors guess at what that threshold should be. (In reply to comment #22) > Furthermore, thumbnailing a progressive JPEG often requires less of the JPEG > to be rendered, since you only have to render up to the resolution just above > the thumbnail. Progressive JPEGs essentially have their own thumbnails > baked in. Maybe if the browsers or the image scaling software we use took advantage of this, then you would have a point. But as it stands, it's not really a good subject for a bug against MediaWiki. It would be a good subject for a bug against ImageMagick. > There are multiple solutions that could deal with this problem without > causing significant drain on the system. Most of them came in after > the guy arbitrarily closed the bug without waiting for ideas on how > to mitigate the problems. Everyone should feel free to submit ideas about bugs that are closed "WONTFIX". > A bug should be left open if it is legitimate. I think WONTFIX was an appropriate way to describe the situation. > Closing the bug prevents > anyone else from coming up with a solution that mitigates all problems. By what mechanism? It's not like we're preventing comments on the bug, or telling upstream projects like libvips or ImageMagick to reject your patches. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
