Rawtherapee: Roadmap for v5.9

[Beep6581]

https://github.com/Beep6581/RawTherapee/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+milestone%3Av5.9

[Beep6581]

Hey

Let me know what is the status of the codebase in terms of stability, feature-completeness and stabilization of PP3 data, so that we can plan for the 5.9 release.

[Thanatomanic]

Hi @Beep6581 welcome back online. No trouble with COVID-19 I hope?

There are quite some issues tagged v.5.9 for which nothing noteworthy has happened. What is your suggested timeframe?

[Floessie]

@Beep6581 @heckflosse @Hombre57 @Desmis @Thanatomanic I noticed that Ingo tagged some issue "6.0". Shouldn't the next version after 5.9 be "5.10"? Wouldn't "6.0" warrant incompatible changes (like PP4 or something)?

[TechXavAL]

There is a discussion about some changes in the future v6.0 that maybe would warrant a change in major version.

[heckflosse]

I tagged some issues 6.0 because that was the only tag available after 5.9

[TechXavAL]

Even if there is a 5.10 version, you may wish to discuss when those tools should be removed (on which version), so you can warn users within the application that they will be removed in the next release version: every time they use a deprecated tool, some sort of warn should be shown telling that tool will disappear in the next version.

If they should be removed in v.5.10 (or 6.0), then you should consider adding those warnings in v.5.9

[Beep6581]

Hi @Beep6581 welcome back online. No trouble with COVID-19 I hope?

There are quite some issues tagged v.5.9 for which nothing noteworthy has happened. What is your suggested timeframe?

Hey, no COVID-related issues here.

Shouldn't the next version after 5.9 be "5.10"? Wouldn't "6.0" warrant incompatible changes (like PP4 or something)?

Yes, 5.10 follows 5.9, though non-computer people find 5.10 confusing so it would be nice to break compatibility to warrant 6.0 :)

every time they use a deprecated tool, some sort of warn should be shown telling that tool will disappear in the next version.

No support for that idea from me, I consider that pointless and bloat. There are more urgent things that users should be notified about: #4261 #2899

[Beep6581]

Hey everyone

How are sentiments regarding feature-completeness and stability with regards to releasing 5.9? I see many commits involving wavelet-related stuff, @Desmis let us know when you feel it's feature-complete so we can feature-freeze and go into bugfixing and eventially get 5.9 out the door this year.

[Thanatomanic]

I think we're pretty much feature complete. There are only two things I feel should definitely be included:

• the changes to the Inspect window contain a regression and fix here https://github.com/Beep6581/RawTherapee/pull/5872
• Lawrence seems almost done with his enhanced perspective correction tool. #5814 Should be included.

Other than that, the current two PRs on changes to the histogram would be nice-to-have, not need-to-have, imo.

[Beep6581]

"Waveform and vectorscopes" #5887 would be nice to have.

I still need a response from @Desmis regarding "Various improvment to Local adjustments" #5903

[Desmis]

@Beep6581

For "Various improvment to Local adjustments" #5903, the response is with Ingo... @heckflosse

Jacques

[heckflosse]

I think, we should delay #5903 for 6.0. Currently it needs too much memory, which will stress Jacques and me if we merge it now.
Better to take some time to improve it before we merge.
Jacques, I hope, you don't mind.

[Desmis]

@Beep6581 @heckflosse

No problem for 6.0

Jacques

[Beep6581]

Great, then I will gear up for releasing a 5.9-beta1 soon.

[Desmis]

@Beep6581
I think we need a few more days to work out with Wayne Sutton, the review (in good English) of all the labels and tooltips in Local adjustments...
But perhaps, it is not a problem, if some labels or tooltips wil be update after ?

Jacques

[Beep6581]

@Desmis there is no hurry. We need to review and complete the strings first, because if they get translated into e.g. 15 languages and then if changes are required then that's 15 times more work later on.

Could you point me to the branch/issue where you are reviewing the strings?

[Desmis]

@Beep6581

We work on this feature since beginning september 2020.

Similarly, rawpedia has been translated and improved by Wayne Sutton
https://rawpedia.rawtherapee.com/Local_controls

Now we are working on tooltips for "softlight & original retinex", "common mask" and "Dynamic range & exposure" in branch "local_tool". I think tomorrow (or perhaps latter) I will merge this branch

I think these tools are finished (labels, tooltips...and fixed bugs), but you can improve if you want

• color and light
• shadows highlight - tone equalizer
• vibrance - warm cool
• log encoding

Tomorrow or just after

• Dynamic range & exposure
• common color mask
• soft light - original retinex

These tools represent about 80% of uses...
I think we need about 1 or 2 weeks (perhaps a little more) to finish

And a big thanks to Wayne Sutton for his patience, the relevance of his proposals, the dialogue between us, ....

Jacques

[rom9]

Hi all, sorry for the late comment.
Regarding the film negative tool, there's still a lot of brainstorming on Pixls, but if you think it's worth it, i could quickly finalize a version with a minimal set of features, which would bring:

• non-raw file support (aka scanner TIFFs)
• huge speedup for raw files (not having to re-demosaic each time)
• backwards compatibility with PP3 created with previous versions.

...and postpone current experiments / feature request for the next release.

What do you think?

EDIT: just in case, the latest hacks have been rolled back, the branch should now be in a clean state ;-)