Lensfun 0.2.6 released
188 views
Skip to first unread message
T. Modes
Jun 25, 2012, 12:36:49 PM6/25/12
to hugin and other free panoramic software
The lensfun library has been released in version 0.2.6. This version
brings some new features, which are already supported by Hugin. It
brings a better support for fisheye lenses from the Hugin side -
loading and saving fisheye lenses from/to lensfun database, now also
with crop. Also the database has been updated. (But no fisheye lenses
yet. Please consider contributing your lenses to the lensfun tracker.
They will be probably included in the next release of lensfun.)
Now we can consider the beginning of a new release cycle for 2012.0.
First we need to agree, which branch will be used: The default branch
with the lensfun library. The branch has enough new features and bug
fixes.
Or do we release it with the gui overhaul branch? In this case we will
merge it into the default branch. Or do postpone this new interface/
features for the next release 2012.2 or even 2013.0?
What do you think? What's your opinion?
Also we need someone who acts as release manager. Any volunteers?
Thomas
brings some new features, which are already supported by Hugin. It
brings a better support for fisheye lenses from the Hugin side -
loading and saving fisheye lenses from/to lensfun database, now also
with crop. Also the database has been updated. (But no fisheye lenses
yet. Please consider contributing your lenses to the lensfun tracker.
They will be probably included in the next release of lensfun.)
Now we can consider the beginning of a new release cycle for 2012.0.
First we need to agree, which branch will be used: The default branch
with the lensfun library. The branch has enough new features and bug
fixes.
Or do we release it with the gui overhaul branch? In this case we will
merge it into the default branch. Or do postpone this new interface/
features for the next release 2012.2 or even 2013.0?
What do you think? What's your opinion?
Also we need someone who acts as release manager. Any volunteers?
Thomas
Bruno Postle
Jun 25, 2012, 7:38:08 PM6/25/12
to hugin and other free panoramic software
On Mon 25-Jun-2012 at 09:36 -0700, Thomas Modes wrote:
>
>Now we can consider the beginning of a new release cycle for 2012.0.
>First we need to agree, which branch will be used: The default branch
>with the lensfun library. The branch has enough new features and bug
>fixes.
>Or do we release it with the gui overhaul branch? In this case we will
>merge it into the default branch. Or do postpone this new interface/
>features for the next release 2012.2 or even 2013.0?
I think the default branch is nearly ready for release and also has
>
>Now we can consider the beginning of a new release cycle for 2012.0.
>First we need to agree, which branch will be used: The default branch
>with the lensfun library. The branch has enough new features and bug
>fixes.
>Or do we release it with the gui overhaul branch? In this case we will
>merge it into the default branch. Or do postpone this new interface/
>features for the next release 2012.2 or even 2013.0?
a lot of new stuff compared to 2011.4.0.
So there should be a 2012.0.0 release from the default branch, then
there isn't so much hurry to get the gui_overhaul branch ready.
>Also we need someone who acts as release manager. Any volunteers?
problems with this one, so it should be a good introduction to the
process. But if I do the whole thing myself it will take a very
long time, really we need a new release manager.
--
Bruno
Terry Duell
Jun 25, 2012, 8:20:11 PM6/25/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
Hello Thomas,
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 02:36:49 +1000, T. Modes <Thomas...@gmx.de> wrote:
[snip]
almost a month now, and it all seems to be working OK (for me), but I tend
to have a pretty simple process.
I also note that the comments on the gui_overhaul branch have slowed down
a bit lately. There really hasn't been a lot of comment, less than I would
have expected for such a change.
I'm inclined to think we should merge and release the gui_overhaul branch.
I think it works well enough for the ordinary user, and a release version
may well produce more comment which will help refine and improve.
> Also we need someone who acts as release manager. Any volunteers?
Sorry, I won't volunteer for the manager task. I would like to help, but
when attempting to assist Bruno on a previous occasion I found many of the
tasks well outside my abilities, and think I was more a hindrance than a
help!
Given that, I will try to assist anyone who takes on the manager role, if
needed.
Cheers,
--
Regards,
Terry Duell
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 02:36:49 +1000, T. Modes <Thomas...@gmx.de> wrote:
[snip]
> Now we can consider the beginning of a new release cycle for 2012.0.
> First we need to agree, which branch will be used: The default branch
> with the lensfun library. The branch has enough new features and bug
> fixes.
> Or do we release it with the gui overhaul branch? In this case we will
> merge it into the default branch. Or do postpone this new interface/
> features for the next release 2012.2 or even 2013.0?
>
> What do you think? What's your opinion?
I have been testing/working with builds of the gui_overhaul branch for
> First we need to agree, which branch will be used: The default branch
> with the lensfun library. The branch has enough new features and bug
> fixes.
> Or do we release it with the gui overhaul branch? In this case we will
> merge it into the default branch. Or do postpone this new interface/
> features for the next release 2012.2 or even 2013.0?
>
> What do you think? What's your opinion?
almost a month now, and it all seems to be working OK (for me), but I tend
to have a pretty simple process.
I also note that the comments on the gui_overhaul branch have slowed down
a bit lately. There really hasn't been a lot of comment, less than I would
have expected for such a change.
I'm inclined to think we should merge and release the gui_overhaul branch.
I think it works well enough for the ordinary user, and a release version
may well produce more comment which will help refine and improve.
> Also we need someone who acts as release manager. Any volunteers?
when attempting to assist Bruno on a previous occasion I found many of the
tasks well outside my abilities, and think I was more a hindrance than a
help!
Given that, I will try to assist anyone who takes on the manager role, if
needed.
Cheers,
--
Regards,
Terry Duell
Harry van der Wolf
Jun 26, 2012, 3:28:40 AM6/26/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
All,
Just like Bruno I think that we should roll out the default branch as 2012.0. It is ready to be rolled out as the new version as of tomorrow, so to speak.
Next to Bruno's arguments about using the default branch I also think that the gui_overhaul still needs some polishing. I do like it very much and I don't even use the "old" gui anymore, but there are still some "design flaws" that at least need to be discussed. Comments on the gui_overhaul have slowed down a bit indeed but there is not a general consensus yet about what should become where and how it should function from the menus. User-friendliness was the main goal AFAIK, but for a new user there still might be some rough edges.
And there are still some glitches on OSX.
So I prefer to have the 2012.0 rolled out as soon as possible and after summer time we can go for the gui_overhaul. If it is rock-solid we do another release pretty soon and otherwise it will take a little longer.
If no other volunteer jumps into the footlight I will volunteer as release manager (so please don't think I feel offended if someone else likes to do it).
And b.t.w.: I go on holidays 21st July
Harry
Just like Bruno I think that we should roll out the default branch as 2012.0. It is ready to be rolled out as the new version as of tomorrow, so to speak.
Next to Bruno's arguments about using the default branch I also think that the gui_overhaul still needs some polishing. I do like it very much and I don't even use the "old" gui anymore, but there are still some "design flaws" that at least need to be discussed. Comments on the gui_overhaul have slowed down a bit indeed but there is not a general consensus yet about what should become where and how it should function from the menus. User-friendliness was the main goal AFAIK, but for a new user there still might be some rough edges.
And there are still some glitches on OSX.
So I prefer to have the 2012.0 rolled out as soon as possible and after summer time we can go for the gui_overhaul. If it is rock-solid we do another release pretty soon and otherwise it will take a little longer.
If no other volunteer jumps into the footlight I will volunteer as release manager (so please don't think I feel offended if someone else likes to do it).
And b.t.w.: I go on holidays 21st July
Harry
kfj
Jun 26, 2012, 8:18:56 AM6/26/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
Am Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 02:20:11 UTC+2 schrieb Tduell:
I also note that the comments on the gui_overhaul branch have slowed down
a bit lately. There really hasn't been a lot of comment, less than I would
have expected for such a change.
I wouldn't be surprised if there simply aren't that many people who have bothered compiling a branch with an experimental new GUI. Most people have plenty of other stuff to do. When the python interface was being developed, I estimate there were a handful of people involved, and even now that it's in the default branch, it's gone largely unnoticed (mainly because it's only distributed on Linux). Release the GUI overhaul branch now and all of the sudden there will be a great number of 'what is this' 'I can't that' etc. etc. messages.
So I also advise to wait with the GUI overhaul release until the next cycle, and then make that the specific 'topic' of the next release and change little else. Seems cleaner to me that way. And if anyone is adamant to stick with the old GUI, they can stick with 2012.0 as the latest status quo before the new GUI became standard.
Kay
Kornel Benko
Jun 26, 2012, 8:42:36 AM6/26/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
Am Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 um 05:18:56, schrieb kfj <_k...@yahoo.com>
>
> Am Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 02:20:11 UTC+2 schrieb Tduell:
> >
> >
> > I also note that the comments on the gui_overhaul branch have slowed down
> >
> > a bit lately. There really hasn't been a lot of comment, less than I would
> >
> > have expected for such a change.
> >
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if there simply aren't that many people who have
> bothered compiling a branch with an experimental new GUI. Most people have
> plenty of other stuff to do. When the python interface was being developed,
> I estimate there were a handful of people involved, and even now that it's
> in the default branch, it's gone largely unnoticed (mainly because it's
> only distributed on Linux). Release the GUI overhaul branch now and all of
> the sudden there will be a great number of 'what is this' 'I can't that'
> etc. etc. messages.
Yes, this is my feeling too. I for one hesitated some time before trying to compile that branch.
> So I also advise to wait with the GUI overhaul release until the next
> cycle, and then make that the specific 'topic' of the next release and
> change little else. Seems cleaner to me that way. And if anyone is adamant
> to stick with the old GUI, they can stick with 2012.0 as the latest status
> quo before the new GUI became standard.
>
> Kay
>
When will the next cycle be? I advise to not to wait, iff the wait time will be too large. (More than 3 months?)
Kornel
T. Modes
Jun 26, 2012, 3:43:30 PM6/26/12
to hugin and other free panoramic software
Okay, there is a preference for a fast release of the default branch.
I backported some changesets from the gui_overhaul branch into the
default branch. These fixed some issue from the last month which are
not related to the new gui.
So maybe we could release a first beta at begin of July.
And after the release (I hope it could be August/September) we can
further work on the gui_overhaul branch for the next step.
Thomas
I backported some changesets from the gui_overhaul branch into the
default branch. These fixed some issue from the last month which are
not related to the new gui.
So maybe we could release a first beta at begin of July.
And after the release (I hope it could be August/September) we can
further work on the gui_overhaul branch for the next step.
Thomas
Gnome Nomad
Jun 27, 2012, 12:18:23 AM6/27/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
On 06/26/2012 02:18 AM, kfj wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 02:20:11 UTC+2 schrieb Tduell:
>
>
> I also note that the comments on the gui_overhaul branch have slowed
> down
> a bit lately. There really hasn't been a lot of comment, less than I
> would
> have expected for such a change.
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if there simply aren't that many people who have
> bothered compiling a branch with an experimental new GUI. Most people
> have plenty of other stuff to do. When the python interface was being
> developed, I estimate there were a handful of people involved, and even
> now that it's in the default branch, it's gone largely unnoticed (mainly
> because it's only distributed on Linux). Release the GUI overhaul branch
> now and all of the sudden there will be a great number of 'what is this'
> 'I can't that' etc. etc. messages.
That's a sign that the new GUI isn't ready for primetime. Especially the
> Am Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 02:20:11 UTC+2 schrieb Tduell:
>
>
> I also note that the comments on the gui_overhaul branch have slowed
> down
> a bit lately. There really hasn't been a lot of comment, less than I
> would
> have expected for such a change.
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if there simply aren't that many people who have
> bothered compiling a branch with an experimental new GUI. Most people
> have plenty of other stuff to do. When the python interface was being
> developed, I estimate there were a handful of people involved, and even
> now that it's in the default branch, it's gone largely unnoticed (mainly
> because it's only distributed on Linux). Release the GUI overhaul branch
> now and all of the sudden there will be a great number of 'what is this'
> 'I can't that' etc. etc. messages.
"I can't" comments when "I can" is perfectly true of the current GUI.
> So I also advise to wait with the GUI overhaul release until the next
> cycle, and then make that the specific 'topic' of the next release and
> change little else. Seems cleaner to me that way. And if anyone is
> adamant to stick with the old GUI, they can stick with 2012.0 as the
> latest status quo before the new GUI became standard.
option to keep the current and highly functional "Classic GUI".
Personally, I'd prefer it if there was a real GUI overhaul built around
the preview window as the main UI, rather than what seems to be
happening with the current GUI overhaul. Note: to turn the preview
window into the main program window will require either making it work
flawlessly with video drivers' GL support, or making it fully functional
with the non-GL preview ...
Of course, how you'd make the preview window UI work with someone who
brings in a bunch of images that aren't aligned yet is a mystery to me.
I'd rather not force people to use something that automatically tries to
align the images, when they'd prefer to detect CPs and do alignment
selectively selectively on images. Maybe just space the images
edge-to-edge across the preview window based on the order in which
they're added to the project?
Of course, I'm weird. Forget the preview window. Give me a full screen
display, no desktop environment GUI borders and widgets and such, with
my images arranged on the screen. Let me drag them around, drag
select'em, right-click on things and select from popup menus, etc. Just
call me an old fan of Targa TIPS.
Question: Someone sometime back talked about storing CPs in some kind of
database format (at least in memory) to speed up handling large DP
datasets. Would that be something to consider in another release or two?
--
Gnome Nomad
gnome...@gmail.com
wandering the landscape of god
http://www.clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
http://www.cafepress.com/otherend/
JohnPW
Jul 2, 2012, 8:14:55 PM7/2/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
The GUI overhaul is interesting, but the binaries I've used on the Mac are definitely not ready for prime time. Only the 5.0.5723 version (compiled by Harry, as I have had no luck compiling on my own) has even worked for me. Later versions don't even save control points, image position information, or even input images. What's to comment on, other than to say they don't work? Even the 5.0.5723 version does everything twice (Batch Processor seems to think he's a Mafia member with the nickname "Johnny Two-times,") and the mask control point editing still has not been not fixed, as far as I can tell.
So I would beg for a stable 64-bit version with a working "classic GUI" for the Mac platform before considering a move further down the "GUI overhaul branch" road.
This is my opinion (although it may not be an informed one.)
John
Tduell
Jul 5, 2012, 10:06:05 PM7/5/12
to hugin and other free panoramic software
Hello Thomas,
I note that Lensfun has just been updated to lensfun-0.2.5-8 in the
Fedora 17 repository.
One hopes that the 2.6 release will be available 'Real Soon' so that
we can build/test any release candidates etc for Fedora with the
latest version.
Cheers,
Terry
Fedora 17 repository.
One hopes that the 2.6 release will be available 'Real Soon' so that
we can build/test any release candidates etc for Fedora with the
latest version.
Cheers,
Terry
Alexandre Prokoudine
Jul 18, 2012, 11:57:16 AM7/18/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
On Monday, June 25, 2012 8:36:49 PM UTC+4, T. Modes wrote:
The lensfun library has been released in version 0.2.6. This version
brings some new features, which are already supported by Hugin. It
brings a better support for fisheye lenses from the Hugin side -
loading and saving fisheye lenses from/to lensfun database, now also
with crop. Also the database has been updated. (But no fisheye lenses
yet. Please consider contributing your lenses to the lensfun tracker.
They will be probably included in the next release of lensfun.)
Hugin from current dev repo says:
Could not find REQUIRED package Lensfun
But I've just installed 0.2.6 from tarball.
Alexandre
Bruno Postle
Jul 18, 2012, 2:27:15 PM7/18/12
to Hugin ptx
On Wed 18-Jul-2012 at 08:57 -0700, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
>
>Hugin from current dev repo says:
>
> Could not find REQUIRED package Lensfun
>
>But I've just installed 0.2.6 from tarball.
I see the same problem with fedora-rawhide (f18).
>
>Hugin from current dev repo says:
>
> Could not find REQUIRED package Lensfun
>
>But I've just installed 0.2.6 from tarball.
lensfun-0.2.6 has moved /usr/include/lensfun.h to
/usr/include/lensfun/lensfun.h
So you need to add /usr/include/lensfun to the FIND_PATH bit in
CMakeModules/FindLensfun.cmake
I'm building now, lets see if it completes.
--
Bruno
Bruno Postle
Jul 18, 2012, 3:07:45 PM7/18/12
to Hugin ptx
On Wed 18-Jul-2012 at 19:27 +0100, Bruno Postle wrote:
>On Wed 18-Jul-2012 at 08:57 -0700, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
>>
>> Could not find REQUIRED package Lensfun
>>But I've just installed 0.2.6 from tarball.
>On Wed 18-Jul-2012 at 08:57 -0700, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
>>
>> Could not find REQUIRED package Lensfun
>>But I've just installed 0.2.6 from tarball.
>I'm building now, lets see if it completes.
Try again, this should now be fixed in the default branch and the
gui_overhaul branch.
--
Bruno
Alexandre Prokoudine
Jul 18, 2012, 6:49:22 PM7/18/12
to hugi...@googlegroups.com
Seems to work now, thanks!
Alexandre
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages