[Digikam-users] Migration problems - Digikam 1.8 to 2.0

Karl Günter Wünsch kgw at mineralien-verkauf.de
Mon Sep 12 23:15:55 BST 2011

On Monday 12 September 2011, David Vincent-Jones wrote:
> There is however a school of thought that maintain that writing data
> directly into an image file can be a source of corruption and that such
> an approach to the raw image file is totally unacceptable.
I am a member of this school of thought and would delete digikam immediately 
if it ever were to start writing such information to the original image file. 
If anything needs to be stored in addition to the original file it IMHO must 
be stored in a sidecar file with a well documented, standardized file format 
(XMP comes to mind) and nowhere else - a database may be a good idea as a 
cache but it IMHO never must become primary store for important information 
unless any necessary upgrade is properly managed and possible without ever 
losing the information in the database!
Karl Günter

More information about the Digikam-users mailing list