This PR makes app icon edge smoother in Ubuntu Bionic Dock and GNOME Activities Favorites (e.g., Fedora 29).
Ubuntu Bionic - BEFORE:

Ubuntu Bionic - AFTER:

Fedora 29 - BEFORE:

Fedora 29 - AFTER:

This PR makes app icon edge smoother in Ubuntu Bionic Dock and GNOME Activities Favorites (e.g., Fedora 29).
Ubuntu Bionic - BEFORE:

Ubuntu Bionic - AFTER:

Fedora 29 - BEFORE:

Fedora 29 - AFTER:

This makes app icon edge smoother in Ubuntu Bionic Dock and GNOME
Activities Favorites (e.g., Fedora 29).
Won't this make quality much worse for HiDPI stuff?
70 | @@ -71,8 +71,8 @@ NetworkStyle::NetworkStyle(const QString &_appName, const int iconColorHueShift, 71 | pixmap.convertFromImage(img); 72 | } 73 | 74 | - appIcon = QIcon(pixmap); 75 | - trayAndWindowIcon = QIcon(pixmap.scaled(QSize(256,256))); 76 | + appIcon = QIcon(pixmap); 77 | + trayAndWindowIcon = QIcon(pixmap.scaled(QSize(64, 64), Qt::KeepAspectRatio, Qt::SmoothTransformation));
Would keeping the size of 256x256 (for all current and future HiDPI-ish situations) change the results?
Would keeping the size of 256x256 (for all current and future HiDPI-ish situations) change the results?
Unfortunately, for unknown for me reasons, 64x64 is the maximum size for which Qt::SmoothTransformation works.
yea I'd say NACK on going back to 64x64 here, this makes assumptions about the size that the OS will use, and 256x256 has been more or less the default for OSX for a while. It's up to the OS to scale this image down.
Scaling to 256x256 likely has no effect because the input image is 256x256?
BTW: a QIcon can contain multiple sizes, what about adding a 64x64 image and keeping the 256x256 one in?
@luke-jr @jonasschnelli @laanwj Thank you for your reviews. Would you mind giving a piece of advice in #14992?