Something doesn’t go right here. I get this kind of image after opening it in the darkroom:
I’m on Ubuntu 24.04.3 and dt 5.3.0+892~g3de2c7950f
I used this to find images:
Is it something - I do wrong / different in my situation?
Kind regards, Jetze
V7 existed in 2 versions. Maybe you went from 6 to ‘7a’ (which was not merged to master as the core developers didn’t like the solution), and the one that got merged to the master branch cannot interpret ‘7a’. I’m sorry about that.
I believe I may be able to check that in the XMP data? Is there a version to watch? Or otherwise which build has been involved. Just to make sure this is the case.
And this probably means I will just reset AgX in all pictures and rework from there?
That’s another way to learn to master AgX thoroughly 
Think I will sleep over it before starting.
Kind regards, Jetze
No need by the way @kofa.
I new what I was doing when taking this path.
It is exactly why I now since a couple of days a darktable-test installation separate. I new I had to do it. And this happens to be shit a bit. But probably resetting all AgX modules in these pictures will in a lot of the not give an enormous change.
I’ve already marked them with a keyword. So will always be able to check later.
I’ve found so far modversions 4 and 7.
7 probably being my bad luck.
This v7a vs v7b only concerns the pivot x (relative exposure). That’s that only slider you’d have to reset.
See
Thanks @kofa!
Not sure what the issue is here. While the amount of consideration you have towards users is to be applauded, any edits made by unreleased / nightly / etc versions cannot be expected to be supported. It’s just too much of a burden, not just on the devs but also on the future evolution of the software.
The earliest any kind of expectations regarding compatibility should arise is when there is an RC, and even then breaking changes are still in play.
Thanks for your work, can’t wait for the release.
There is no issue. It’s just a heads-up. Quite a few, including myself, have relied on compatibility (migrating old edits) even before AgX was merged to the master branch. With the clean-up, that will no longer be possible; I just wanted to let everyone know in time, so they can migrate the edits they’d like to keep.
Ugh, from your reply it feels like my wording came across as standoffish when the only intent was to show support for your decision. Maybe I’m not in the right headspace for online interactions this morning. Apologies for the bad vibe.
Or it could be me. 
I love this forum. Even if I wouldn’t be interested in photography, I would love it. Simply because I love the interaction between each other.
@kofa I can’t say, that I don’t care about dropping backwards compatibility. But that’s part of the game if you use a developer version. So I absolutely support this decision. It doesn’t make sense to migrate dead code into the stable version.
Thank you and keep up your fantastic work.
Well, I got you right - so you possibly were clear enough 
Kind regards, Jetze
Please be prepared for the new version to arrive early next week. Use the weekend well.
Yay!
Hello kofa and the entire team,
Thank you for this clear heads-up and for the complete transparency regarding the AgX module’s roadmap.
I fully support this decision. The fact that you created (even temporary) migration mechanisms throughout the development process has demonstrated great professionalism and strong empathy towards the brave users who test the master branch.
Removing this migration code now is perfectly logical. As other users have already mentioned, this is a necessary and responsible step that will achieve a crucial goal: ensuring clean, lightweight, and stable code for the AgX module in the future stable version of darktable. This is the best guarantee of reliability for the software moving forward.
Thank you again for all your hard work
Greetings from the Luberon,
Christian
