better validate numeric hatch values for fills

[imager.git] / TODO

diff --git a/TODO b/TODO
index f2687283c776e33b9a95f8046dc5384a78cfac63..61fb9634f2ec22eab8ddaa93618293ad998ac13d 100644 (file)
--- a/TODO
+++ b/TODO
@@ -6,25 +6,32 @@ Release Plans (subject to change)
 brown-bag bugs may add intermediate releases.  The dates are goals,
 not commitments.
 
-For 0.64: (speculative)
+For 0.65:
 
 PNG re-work (#29268)
 
+For 0.64: (speculative)
+
+thick lines (#28854)
+
+have alpha channel work treated as coverage for primitives (more
+general combine parameter)
+
+add some extra combine modes (hard/soft light, screen)
+
+For 0.63:
+
+general alpha channel fixes (#29879, etc) (done)
+
 give 4/2 channel images a background color when saving to pnm (#30074)
+(done)
 
 give 4/2 channel images a background color when saving to BMP (#30075)
+(done)
 
 give 4/2 channel images a background color when saving to JPEG
 (#29876)
 
-For 0.63: (tentative)
-
-thick lines (#28854)
-
-have alpha channel work treated as coverage for primitives (more
-general combine parameter)
-
-general alpha channel fixes (#29879, etc)
 
 For 0.62:
 
@@ -399,6 +406,19 @@ New Features:
 
 - arc outlines
 
+- filled/outlined ellipses and elliptical arcs
+
+  Complexities include:
+
+  a) when drawing a pie segment, are the angles specified the real
+  angles (since the scaling changes the angles if you just use sin() and
+  cos() directly) or the angle before scaling?  I can see cases where
+  both are useful.
+
+  b) can you control the angles of the axes of symmetry? (the axes would
+  remain at right angles to each other) Does this change the effect of
+  the d1 and d2 parameters?
+
 - complex lines/curves:
   - thick lines:
     - dotted/dashed lines