<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 16 Jan 2017, at 11:59, Dan Dascalescu <<a href="mailto:ddascalescu@gmail.com" class="">ddascalescu@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Is digiKam worth it?</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">Of course digiKam is worth the effort to bring its communication mechanism up to date by dragging it out of its arcane dark-age mailing list system. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">However, I wouldn’t want to see progression on the important bits to be diverted because certain users are clamouring for this evolution. digiKam devs, keep up the great work! We appreciate it very much! And, Giles’ open attitude to let somebody else run with the non-core changes which he outlined is also appreciated. Let’s see if somebody with the requisite skills and time takes the reins…</div></body></html>