Opened 11 years ago

Closed 6 years ago

#411 closed new feature (wontfix)

New application "images"

Reported by: lemon-head Owned by: lemon-head
Priority: major Milestone: unassigned
Component: FrameWork Keywords: application, images, privacy


For images that we don't want to be available for public, it would be safer not to have direct links into our server filesystem. This can be achieved by using the request router for images as well, and then do @copy($imgfile, 'php://output'); This does already happen in UserView::avatar($userId), but we don't use it. I am not sure about performance costs.. Another open question is how the requests should look like: images/avatars/lemon-head or images/avatars/lemon-head_asdfjkl456.jpg images/gallery/lemon-head/img_23456.jpg etc One thing we should keep in mind: Whenever possible, try to keep the request string for one image consistent, so one image does always have the same url, and the same url points to the same image. In case someone is not allowed to see the image, we have two possibilities: a) copy something else into the php://output stream b) redirect to something else This "something else" will at first be no more but a boring dummy image, but maybe we can find better solutions.

I don't know which one is better.. See also #65#comment:9

Change History (9)

comment:1 Changed 11 years ago by lemon-head

  • Owner set to lemon-head
  • Status changed from new to assigned

comment:2 Changed 11 years ago by lemon-head

[4078] - first version, proof-of-concept. Can do avatars in full-size, but nothing more.

Everything is possible, but the question is how should we design the request urls.

comment:4 Changed 11 years ago by feuerdaemon

  • Milestone changed from unassigned to BigPicture

comment:5 Changed 11 years ago by philipp

  • Milestone changed from BigPicture to unassigned

Milestone BigPicture? deleted

comment:6 Changed 9 years ago by micha

  • follow_up changed from none to review code

This ticket is quite old.

I wonder if it makes sense to centrally show all pictures from that URL '/images'. Right now, we're making use of the framework to show pics of members in the Member Application and in the Gallery Application. It's convenient to keep the functionality there as you also upload and modify pictures in the corresponding models and store them in different directories. However it might be even better to do this via an own Images Application.

What do others say?

comment:7 Changed 7 years ago by TimLoal

  • Component changed from BW General to FrameWork

comment:8 Changed 7 years ago by jsfan

  • Milestone Future deleted

Milestone Future deleted

comment:9 Changed 6 years ago by guaka

  • Milestone set to unassigned
  • Resolution set to wontfix
  • Status changed from assigned to closed


Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.