[Image-SIG] Pillow: the "unfriendly" fork?
Joao S. O. Bueno
gwidion at mpc.com.br
Thu Dec 20 22:26:05 CET 2012
On 20 December 2012 17:50, Mark Sienkiewicz <sienkiew at stsci.edu> wrote:
> On 12/20/12 14:00, Alex Clark wrote:
>> Until this point, we've been attempting to track changes via "upstream" tickets in the hope that one day there'd be a new PIL release and we'd stop Pillow development. However I now suspect that the more likely scenario is that we will have to declare at some point that Pillow is "the unfriendly PIL fork", meaning that we will not continue to track changes in Pillow along with the "upstream" changes in PIL.
> As far as I know, there is nobody acting in bad faith here; it is just necessary to acknowledge the reality of the situation. Don't feel bad about it -- just do it.
> I don't consider it an "unfriendly" action. This fork doesn't mean we don't appreciate the work of the original author -- rather, we like it enough to make a fork, if that's what it takes to keep it alive.
> Mark S.
it is definitively time for Python to have a working, obvious, easy
to install, way to deal with images,
and trying to tell people "install PIL, but if that does not work, do
install Pillow" is not that great when
you are trying to talk soemone into use Python due to the easy of
getting things done.
+1 for partting from the legacy code that has not been updated, so that we
can have new code with less burden.
More information about the Image-SIG