Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: base system Category: tasks Priority: normal Assigned to: walkah Reported by: walkah Updated by: walkah Status: patch Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image-core2.patch (7.25 KB) here's the updated patch. walkah Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 28, 2005 - 15:31 : walkah Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image_0.inc (7.44 KB) Due to popular demand - attached here is an image.inc for inclusion (in includes/), that will offer some basic image detection and manipulation functionality to drupal's core. currently image.inc is responsible for managing image 'toolkits' - these are either PHP modules (e.g. GD) or external programs (e.g. imagemagick) that handle the actual manipulation of images. also included is the default "GD" toolkit (that supports both GD1 or GD2, depending on which is installed). PHP comes bundled with gd as of version 4.3 - therefore this is a reasonable default. However, other toolkits will follow (I presume) - they can be installed in includes/ (as image.$toolkit.inc). There are 5 main functions that modules may now utilize to handle images: * image_get_info() - this function checks a file - if it exists and is a valid image file , it will return an array containing things like the pixel dimensions of the image, plus the 'type' and common extension. * image_scale - resizes a given image to fit within a given width / height dimensions, while maintaining aspect ratio (not distorting the image). - this function can be used to generate thumbnails, or ensure a maximum resolution, etc. * image_resize - similar to image_scale (but will not respect aspect ratio - may well distort the image). * image_rotate - rotate an image by X degrees * image_crop - crops an image to a given rectangle (defined as top-left x/y coordinates plus a width & height of the rectangle). In a follow up I will post a patch that does the following: * adds some default settings to admin/settings : * toolkit selection (and possibly configuration) * default thumbnail dimensions (WxH) - to be used as a system-wide default * maximum dimensions (WxH ) - to be used as a system-wide default * changes the user picture handling to silently resize uploaded pictures to fit within the specified dimensions (rather than throwing errors). * uses image_get_info() to verify logo uploads in admin/theme configuration * patches upload.module to respect maximum dimensions for uploaded images. Contribution modules will now be able to rely on these base manipulation functions to offer additional functionality (such as image nodes, photo galleries, advanced image manipulation, etc) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 28, 2005 - 15:50 : walkah Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image-core.patch (7.22 KB) and the patch (as mentioned above). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 28, 2005 - 19:41 : rkendall Thanks for that, I think I could find that useful. Not meaning to criticize your very nice looking work, but I don't quite get the use of the /ext/ info in image_get_info() , it just seems to be duplicating information from the /type/ info. Thanks again, Ross. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 29, 2005 - 07:13 : walkah 'type' - is used primarily by the gd functions, which open image files using createFromPng / createFromJPEG / etc... and they use 'JPEG' not 'JPG' 'ext' - is the common file extension - i.e. 'JPG' not 'JPEG'. i agree, kind of a shame, but mostly harmless (imo) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 30, 2005 - 13:07 : Dries Please rename 'ext' to 'extension' and document the difference between 'type' and 'extension'. It is confusing at best. Personally, I prefer to use 'resolution' instead of 'res', and 'destination' instead of 'dest'. The punctuation in the PHPdoc code seems random: some sentences end with a point, others do not. Some code seems to wrap but that might be due to the fact that the image.inc file has been uploaded with the wrong MIME-type. Otherwise this patch looks good, but I haven't really tested it yet. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 31, 2005 - 09:44 : Bèr Kessels Is there a good reason for introducing YAPS (yet another plugin system) and not using tour well tested, optimised and wellknown .module system for the toolkits? Is there really a differerence in performance and complexity between: image.$toolkit.inc and image_gd.module? If not, please (with sugar on top and such), we should not make more/new plugin systems. Bèr ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 31, 2005 - 09:45 : Bèr Kessels forgot: But other than that, great work, a big +1 from me to go into core. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 31, 2005 - 09:58 : walkah ber - re the toolkit "framework" vs. modules - the issue is that there is 0 overlap between toolkit functionality and the current set of module hooks. also, the point of image.inc is to encapsulate the toolkit functionality so that module developers, etc need not worry about which toolkit(s) are installed and available. i'm not sure, though, that toolkits really fit as modules. i.e. can you throttle a toolkit? is there any case where a toolkit could or should implement /any/ of the current module hooks? anyone else have some thoughts on this? I think polluting the module namespace with a ton of image support files would be worse than the 20 or so lines to implement this "custom plugin" framework. maybe i'm off base though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 31, 2005 - 10:08 : moshe weitzman i agree that the toolkit framework proposed here is justified. This is a plugin system just like our DB abstraction layer, which has served us very well. It is also analogous to the flexinode plugin system, which everyone seems to love. +1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 31, 2005 - 10:08 : killes@www.drop.org I don't think having the .inc files as modules makes sense. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 31, 2005 - 10:08 : adrian I agree with you and dries on this one. This is kind of analogous to the file api, whereby this api just extends file support, for image filetypes. Any modules can then be built to use images , for instance the image.module which just becomes an image node type, and the flexinode image field type. Plus, having it in core and maintained as such is a big improvement over the current situation (re: the old image module) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 31, 2005 - 10:41 : walkah Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/image_1.inc (7.64 KB) attached is an updated image.inc - taking into consideration dries' suggestions. biggest is : removing 'type' from image_get_info - moving that to the GD functions where the jpg vs. JPEG distinction is required. also, tried to clean up some phpdoc comments, and use "destination" and "extension" instead of "dest" and "ext". (updated patch to follow). -- View: http://drupal.org/node/16358 Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/16358