On 4/20/11, Paul Sbarra wrote: > Regarding the licensing I think we should look at this from a larger > perspective. I picked libraw from the todo list because it was there. The list also mentions rawspeed :) I, sort of, put both there :) > I don't think using libraw gives us any additional functionality over what > could be done with dcraw. Really? :) How about libraries currently being faster due to all sorts of optimizations, like rawspeed being threaded and using SSE2? > What's the longer-term strategy for supporting raw files? The Darktable > project is _really_ good at developing raw images (non-destructively). It > would be great if you could have that same functionality but also include > the additional image processing capabilities that GIMP provides (blur, > heal/clone, layers, etc). I think houz did a nice description before: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=26372766 This is a view from dt project, but it makes a perfect sense. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org _______________________________________________ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
