[Digikam-devel] database fields in the future

Colin Guthrie gmane at colin.guthr.ie
Tue Jun 12 12:28:08 BST 2007

Arnd Baecker wrote:
> If (2) is more flexible and useable by plugins that sounds like a plus
> to me...

For me this is the biggest thing.

At the moment (as has long been discussed), I would really like a way to
store key/value pairs from plugins against "items" and "albums"
(including virtual albums - e.g. tag views, searches etc.)

For me a key/value pair is enough and things like format conversion
(storeing floats/integers can just be done in the plugin).

I guess ultimately an interface like kconfig would do fine and could
actually make the implementation in e.g. digikam quite simple - it just
needs to store a big block of XML and we're laughing. A simple extension
of kconfig for this purpose should suffice. WDYT?

OK it's not as uber flexible as allowing plugins to add fields but it's
a lot more transparent in terms of the kipi API.... unless I've totally
misunderstood and you were referring to Digikam plugins rather than kipi
plugins........ :S


More information about the Digikam-devel mailing list