Re: [PATCH] Don't show frames around images with an alpha plane
- From: "Jaap A. Haitsma" <jaap haitsma org>
- To: Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>
- Cc: nautilus-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't show frames around images with an alpha plane
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:49:38 +0200
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 19:51, Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 18:39 +0200, Jaap A. Haitsma wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:02, Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 2009-09-06 at 21:46 +0200, Jaap A. Haitsma wrote:
>> >> Very small patch that doesn't show a frame around images with an alpha
>> >> plane which makes the images look a lot better
>> >>
>> >> It's actually a modification of this patch which I committed a wile ago
>> >>
>> >> commit 2a94803b44010e3c47a9f7b94894fab8d6062abc
>> >> Author: Jaap A. Haitsma <jaap haitsma org>
>> >> Date: Sat Jul 18 20:45:05 2009 +0200
>> >>
>> >> Fix handling of small images/icons
>> >>
>> >> Small images with an alpha plane don't get a frame
>> >> Use different scaling strategy for small images. Small images/icons
>> >> won't get up scaled in default zoom view. They are shown in their actual
>> >> Fixes bug #585186
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Can I commit the attached patch?
>> >
>> > I don't think the patch does what this says, does it?
>> > It only touched whether the image is framed or not, and it seems to
>> > change that in another way than the above says.
>>
>> Seems that I'm confusing people here. The attached patch makes sure
>> that if an image has an alpha plane it will not put a frame.
>
> Well, the commit message also says its changes the scaling strategy.
That's where I confused everybody I guess. That commit is already in
GNOME git since the 18th of July
>
>>
>> > However, I agree on the alpha handling. Frameing something that is
>> > transparent just look weird. If you e.g. set a background other than
>> > white the "inside" of the frame will look very weird, like putting a
>> > transparency slide in a frame.
>> >
>> > We're past the hard code freeze though, so maybe its a bit late to
>> > change this.
>>
>> The risk of a regression with this patch is 0. Can't we ask for a code
>> freeze break?
>
> Sure, can you do that?
>
Will do
Jaap
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]