<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body><div>I don't agree. Any options that can "harm" an inattentive user. Any date changes are a harm.</div><div>For example, I installed digikam and imported my pictures. Some of them went to Miscellaneous / Places / zoo instead of Places / zoo. For sure I changed it right away but I was not aware of that timestamp update option being turned on and changed the date of 300+ files.</div><div>For sure it might be considered as a user issue but again, I think user should be protected. Let's at least allow users to turn that option on/off in the initial setup wizard.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div id="composer_signature"><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757" dir="auto">Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.</div></div><div><br></div><div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"><!-- originalMessage --><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Remco Viëtor <remco.vietor@wanadoo.fr> </div><div>Date: 2017-01-14 8:11 AM (GMT-07:00) </div><div>To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power of open source <digikam-users@kde.org> </div><div>Subject: Re: digikam default options </div><div><br></div></div>On samedi 14 janvier 2017 07:30:08 CET Andrey Goreev wrote:<br>> Well, I take pictures to capture moments. So why should the date of the<br>> moment be changed if I simply added an info in order to be able to find<br>> that picture later ? <br><br>There is a tag reflecting the time the image was taken. That one is not (and <br>should not be) modified on any update, afaik.<br><br>Also, we were talking about the best default for a configuration option. If <br>you do not like the default, you can change it.<br><br>But for me, a timestamp that's supposed to record the date/time an image was <br>changed should _as_a_default_ do exactly that, to avoid surprising (new) <br>users.<br><br>Remco.<br><br><br></body></html>