Merge lp://qastaging/~holger+lp/simple-scan/simple-scan-cli into lp://qastaging/~simple-scan-team/simple-scan/trunk
Proposed by
Holger Hans Peter Freyther
| Status: | Rejected |
|---|---|
| Rejected by: | Michael Nagel |
| Proposed branch: | lp://qastaging/~holger+lp/simple-scan/simple-scan-cli |
| Merge into: | lp://qastaging/~simple-scan-team/simple-scan/trunk |
| Diff against target: |
558 lines (+476/-8) 5 files modified
.bzrignore (+7/-0) configure.ac (+1/-0) src/Makefile.am (+35/-7) src/simple-scan-cli.vala (+432/-0) src/ui.vala (+1/-1) |
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp://qastaging/~holger+lp/simple-scan/simple-scan-cli |
| Related bugs: |
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Nagel | Disapprove | ||
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Description of the change
I was not able to find a tool that can scan to a PDF from cli (scanimage does not support it). I hacked this together, it hardcodes a lot (A4, DPI, scan mode), I messed up the author and (bzr rewrite has no interactive mode that would allow me to fix it).
Right now the question is if you would do:
1.) Build a libsimplescan and install it (.vapi file so I could build my cli with that)
2.) Include a cli directly
To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
| Michael Nagel (nailor) wrote | # |
Revision history for this message
| Holger Hans Peter Freyther (holger+lp) wrote | # |
Unmerged revisions
Preview Diff
[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
Hi Holger,
ultimately Robert will have to approve ;)
I have never worked with such merge requests.
Here are a few thoughts of mine though:
- thanks for contributing!
- why didn't you write a three line shell wrapper around scanimage that scans to a temporary file and then calls some combination of convert/pdftk? i am positively interested in this!
- what's the benefit from merging this into trunk? it's not exactly in line with the mission statement for simple scan. (there is no mission statement -- but if there was one it would be about making scanning simple for casual users). on the other hand, it might increase usage of the simple-scan, leading to fixes in the code for the benefit of all users. also it might improve maintainability by allowing to easily reproduce crashes...
- allowing some configuration via command line arguments would definitly make it more useful for other users...
- there seem to be some unrelated changes mixed into the commits, like changing from grayscale to lineart. lineart is theoretically correct, but caused problems for many users, so grayscale it is...
Thanks again,
it would be great if you could comment on some of these
and I am waiting for a comment from Robert.
Also, I am not really sure if this is the best place to have such discussion, but let's just try.
If it does not work out, we might just open a ticket/bug report, IMHO those can be abused for general discussion quite well...
Best Regards