[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 37790] [DRT/Chromium] Import Chromium image_diff as ImageDiff
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
Mon Apr 19 21:21:54 PDT 2010
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37790
--- Comment #12 from Dirk Pranke <dpranke at chromium.org> 2010-04-19 21:21:52 PST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > (In reply to comment #6)
> > > We could use the existing ImageDiff CG on mac, since all the dependencies are
> > > the same, but on Windows and Linux we would still need our own ImageDiff.
> >
> > Of course, there are multiple WebKit ports on both Windows and Linux as well,
> > so a similar point stands.
>
> I don't understand what you're suggesting we do. There are 2 ImageDiffs
> checked in right now: CG and QT. If we want to use the CG one for Windows
> chromium, we would have to grab all the WebKitSupport files used by WebKit/win
> (I don't think this is done by update-webkit --chromium). If we want to use
> the QT one for Linux chromium, we'd have to install a bunch of QT dev libraries
> on linux (probably done manually via apt-get on the slaves and all developers).
> Are you suggesting we go this route?
Not really. Mostly I was looking for a way for different ports to not have to
port ImageDiff into their own framework when there's really no reason to do so.
At one point I suggested that we could probably code this in Python using the
Python Imaging Library and get a single portable implementation that way, but
I'm not sure if that would really be any better.
If the ports aren't using common libraries like libpng then maybe there's
nothing really to be gained. It just seems silly to have to duplicate them
every time.
-- Dirk
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.webkit.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
More information about the webkit-unassigned
mailing list