[Digikam-devel] [digikam] [Bug 318726] Some BQM tools in a workflow don't restore (all) parameters properly [patch]

[Jan Wolter]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=318726

--- Comment #30 from Jan Wolter <jan.wolter at upb.de> ---
(In reply to Gilles Caulier from comment #15)
> A filter define 3 parts :
> 
> - an engine to process image, as you pass an image, it processed, and a
> target image is provided. ex : 
> - a settings container, to pass to engine to tune filter effect. This
> container is used by BQM to get and set from XML to settings and vis-versa.
> Conversion is done through BatchToolSet, BatchToolSettings, and
> WorkflowManager classes from BQM. To simplify, filter settings stored in
> container, are converted as a QMap of (QString, QVariant) pair and converted
> by Qt automatically to XML in Workflow manager loops. Note that XML
> conversion is only used in BQM, not Editor. Editor use VersionManager engine
> which is mostly complicated and we don't need it in BQM.
> - a setttings widget which permit to BQM and Editor to show all settings in
> GUI.

I took a more global view on the implementation of the image filters. I noticed
that the stratefy based on a settings and container implementation (in
libs/dimg/filters/) is not used in the same manner for all filters. In the
settings code the GUI is implemented, which is used by batch queue tools (in
utilities/queuemanager/basetools/) and from the editor tools (in
imageplugins/). The container implementations are only used to communicate with
BQM.

But I noticed that there are only containers for 4 tools: local contrast, white
balance, curves, and icc. But more surprising was for me that not all tools
share a common settings implementation. For example, the resize tool has a
completely different implementation in the image editor
(imageplugins/transform/resizetool.cpp) than in the batch queue manager
(utilities/queuemanager/basetools/transform/resize.cpp). Gilles, could you
please explain these differences?

By the way, first I will fix the remaining problems mentioned in this bug
report. But I tooks this look ti see how much work it would be to port the
remaing tools (imageplugins/TODO) to BQM.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.