Files
photocraft/apps
Ahmed Hosny c25630b5fa app.save: encode on the save worker, not the UI thread (#2488) (#2517)
* app.save: encode on the save worker, not the UI thread (#2488)

The automation save ran export+write inline inside the control drain,
freezing the window and every queued control request while a large
document encoded — and overrunning the 60s reply deadline. It now uses
the same #2017 background path as File > Save when background jobs are
on: the encode and the capability-scoped write run on a worker, the
document is locked, and the control reply waits on the job (wait: false
answers {job, pending} at once). Tests and the web keep the inline path.

The save job's result now carries the path alongside the warnings, so
waiting callers get the same {path, warnings} reply both ways.

* app.save: never fire saveDocument hooks from automation saves; review fixes (#2488)

Automation saves complete in the job tick, long after run_waiting lifted
its synchronous event suppression, so the background branch fired the
user's saveDocument script bindings and Image Assets — the exact hooks
docs/control-protocol.md promises never run for automation. SaveJob now
carries an automation flag and records through saved_automation, which
skips document_saved on every path; the inline fallback records through
it too, so both modes behave the same. A regression test installs a
saveDocument binding and asserts it fires for an interactive save and
not for app.save.

The desktop's two save workers collapse into one save_through parameterized
by the write step (drift between interactive and automation saves), the
Saved status/notices are translated (Saved {name}, 16 locales), the pending
reply carries warnings like file.save's, and the success payload is built
at one site.
2026-10-11 02:54:14 -04:00
..