Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LAB gets its own class #8

Closed
wants to merge 7 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

daveheitzman
Copy link
Collaborator

I'm creating this changeset as a pull request rather than pushing directly to color/master as I'd rather you reviewed it and approve of the direction I'm going here.

contrast can now be passed a symbol to specify which algorithm to use. We have 3 algorithms available at present.

@halostatue
Copy link
Owner

Thanks—I want to release 1.6 first and then we can start working with this and another change that's been proposed (y implementation of YIQ is totally borked) to release as 2.0 next month or so.

I'll look at this over the weekend (long weekend here in Canada).

@daveheitzman
Copy link
Collaborator Author

That's perfect. On another note, travis keeps failing. do you know how to fix? (locally, it complains it cannot load simplecov)

@halostatue
Copy link
Owner

Yeah. Edit .travis.yml to remove 1.9.2 entirely; also, change rbx to rbx-2 and remove the installation of ruby-sl in the before script.

All changes I need to make on master for the next release regardless. SimpleCov appears to behave very badly under Ruby 1.9.2, and I'm not going to explicitly support it with any of my projects anymore (but I probably won't block people from upgrading to it).

As a side note, since I'm targeting LAB for Color 2.0, I'm probably going to drop Ruby 1.8 support in the same timeframe.

@daveheitzman
Copy link
Collaborator Author

okay, thanks. I'll just wait for you to push a change for that, and put up with travis failing for 1.9.2 in the meantime.

In my opinion, continued support for 1.8.7 would be a worthwhile priority, unless there are desirable features that very hard to implement with it.

@halostatue
Copy link
Owner

I'm closing this in favour of #12, which is your code here targeted to the 2.0 release. It will hopefully also pass unit tests. ;)

@halostatue halostatue closed this Jul 17, 2014
@halostatue halostatue mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants