Panasonic DC-G9M2 support (data only)

[kmilos]

Partly addresses darktable-org/darktable#15679

Used ADC 16.0. Crop is unverified.

This depends on #367

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (0c1902a) 59.08% compared to head (6fa3fef) 59.08%.
Report is 874 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #529   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    59.08%   59.08%           
========================================
  Files          232      232           
  Lines        13903    13903           
  Branches      1939     1939           
========================================
  Hits          8214     8214           
  Misses        5556     5556           
  Partials       133      133           

Flag	Coverage Δ
benchmarks	8.17% <ø> (ø)
integration	47.49% <ø> (ø)
linux	57.00% <ø> (ø)
macOS	18.67% <ø> (ø)
rpu_u	47.49% <ø> (ø)
unittests	18.22% <ø> (ø)
windows	∅ <ø> (∅)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[LebedevRI]

@kmilos hmm you know what we could do?

Since we are polluting cameras.xml with garbage anyways,
why don't we add "dormant" entries for cameras that exist in the wild,
(of which we are ignorant of), e.g. for the purposes of RPU sample asking
(RPU does that automatically more or less).

We will need supported="unknown" though, so rawspeed does not
start considered them supported since it's present in cameras.xml.

Does that sound interesting to you?

[kmilos]

Sorry Roman, I might be slow these days - how is this exactly different/what's the benefit compared to what we have today: error and ask for samples if camera is not supported, or mode='no-samples'?

[LebedevRI]

mode='no-samples' means "this camera was supposedly explicitly supported, but we don't really know".
Note the word "explicitly". Currently we can't add a camera to cameras.xml without
deeming it either supported or unsupported.

supported="unknown-no-samples" would allow us to list (in cameras.xml) more known
(to exist in the real world) cameras, without deeming them either supported or unsupported.
That could be helpful e.g. for RPU sample request lists.

This, of course, hinges on the access to such list of real-world cameras.

[kmilos]

This, of course, hinges on the access to such list of real-world cameras.

So far, I've just been using https://www.dpreview.com/products/timeline?year=all&brand=&category=cameras for manually checking some coverage and to keep on top of new cameras...