-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 621
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Moving imageops
and similar functionality to the imageprocs
crate
#2238
Comments
The |
Great, image-rs/imageproc#7 is the corresponding issue on the My current action plan is to write up a list of all the functions in How does that sound? |
As the image crate has a huge number of users and very little activity happens on the I'm in favour of:
The question of deprecation or retiring existing (Edit to add context for other readers: I’m the maintainer of the |
Yeah, this would involve deprecating the methods now and only removing in the next major release (which won't be any time soon given we haven't even started planning it yet) During this process it is also worth looking at whether these methods are using internal functionality / are tightly tied to the image crate. Like the |
I've written up the list in a tracking table in the top comment which can be updated as we make progress toward this larger goal. Let me know if you'd like to change anything or if I've missed anything. |
To clarify, the last step should probably be deprecated from image crate. We'll remove all the depreciated items in one batch when we do the 0.26 release in 6-12 months (or whenever it happens... haven't started planning that release yet) |
I've finished my case-by-case analysis of the current state of things and it doesn't look great, 1/43 functions has an equivalent version in |
This is true, but removing that functionality still has great value for simplifications across the library. For example, the |
Tracking Table
Key
imageproc
imageproc
but not yet released.imageproc
but still inimage
image
imageproc
SubImage
that does no processing)SubImage
that does no processing, compose::crop can be used instead but returns a new imageoverlay
andreplace
so I don't see the point migrating this a public functionOriginal Comment
At the moment the
image
crate has several image processing functions inthe
imageops
module which seems a bit strange to me as they look likethey would better belong in the
imageproc
crate. Is there a reason whysuch functionality is in this crate, or is perhaps a holdover from long
ago?
I would be happy to do the work migrating/integrating the functionality
into
imageproc
if you'd like.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: