zander at kde.org
Thu May 31 12:27:11 BST 2007
On Thursday 31 May 2007 12:52:53 David Jarvie wrote:
> On Thursday 31 May 2007 8:30, Thomas Zander wrote:
> > As I suggested elsewhere the haste seems unneeded and unwanted as we
> > need to be using this code and not talking on mailinglists for
> > another week, painting the next bikeshed a semi-transparant color.
> > So, I would really like it if we made sure we got some use cases and
> > then we can see if things like having an alpha in the blended color
> > is needed, wheather RGB blending is good enough and what method
> > signature is best so we don't end up with 2 methods if we can do with
> > one good one.
> I have no direct interest in colour blending etc., but I've been
> following these threads for some days and feel concern about the way
> things have been handled. I must say that Matthew's current proposals
> seem to me to have wider support than the code which was committed on
> Monday, so if there is an objection to having two alternatives in the
> code, the obvious solution is to replace the recent commit by what's
> being proposed now.
Does it make sense to have 2 methods to not upset some people? Its not a
great idea for an API that has to be public for the next years.
Again, when there are 4 proposals on how to solve this mess and they all
have a quite different behavior I think proposing yet another patch is
not the right way to solve this stuff.
At the same time we have been talking about this for quite some time, and
everyone wants a resolution, so I have to ask; what is so bad about
waiting until we have several apps use some sort of blending so we have
some real use cases where we can reason from which behavior is the best.
Would people be ok with leaving the current API in for some weeks and
gather experience in the use cases first?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the kde-core-devel