Closed
Conversation
1 task
Contributor
Author
|
Closing because these changes are already merged in #14216 👍🏻 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Prerequisites
Description
With ImageSharp 3.0.0 and ImageSharp.Web 3.0.0 being released in the last months, we can now bump our dependency versions for the next CMS v12 major, ensuring we use the latest versions on release.
Because the ImageSharp dependency has been decoupled in v11 (see PR #12907) and there's no binary breaking changes in
Umbraco.Cms.Imaging.ImageSharp, you should still be able to use the v11 version (with a dependency on ImageSharp v2) on v12. I don't see a great reason for requiring this, because even with the new Six Labors Split License, as a transitive package dependency it will be licensed under the open source Apache License. And if you do have a direct dependency in your own code (e.g. because you're doing custom processing) and meet the other conditions, I'd recommend supporting the awesome work and purchase the Six Labors Commercial Use License instead.Testing this is quite straight forward: all the tests should pass and requesting an image with ImageSharp commands (e.g. media thumbnails within the back-office that add a
?width=500) should still work.