<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body><div>I would pick a linux distro that is going to support 32 bit for a while and talk to their packagers to see if they might be interested in supporting the 32 bit version of digikam.</div><div><br></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: Jack Marxer <jmarxer@gmail.com> </div><div>Date: 2017-11-02 2:22 PM (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: 32 bits digiKam bundles : still necessary ? </div><div><br></div></div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">I also think that dropping 32 bit versions is a good idea. It would allow more time and effort to be directed to improving digiKam.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">Thank you for all your excellent work on digiKam, developers and maintainers. I've been using it for many years now and am very happy with it. I would like to see better face recognition and maybe dropping 32 bit versions might make more time and effort available for that improvement.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">Jack Marxer</div></div>
</body></html>