[Digikam-users] Big problems with medium to large sized collections under Microsoft Windows

[Mike Morris]

I have been following the Windows digiKam discussion, and have run a large
number of experiments with the program.

Sadly, I have given up trying to use the Windows digiKam version.  It is
way too buggy and unacceptably unstable.  Maybe someday . . . .

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Wolfgang Strobel <wolfgang_strobel at yahoo.de
> wrote:

> **
> Hello,
> I am pleased that others still are struggling with the windows problem.
> unfortunately still no one seems to really want to take the actual
> problem.
> it was certainly a lot of windows user gratifying when digikam even
> with large collections of images would work perfectly. with small
> pictures collections usually no one needs special management.
> I hope soon of a workable solution to the reuse of under windows
> digkam heard.
>
> wolfgang
>
> Am 06.12.2012 19:41, schrieb Brian Morrison:
>
> > On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 18:14:11 +0000
> > Andrew Goodbody wrote:
> >
> >> On 05/12/12 16:52, Brian Morrison wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 20:59:53 +0000
> >>> Andrew Goodbody wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> If you want to build digiKam from source, I can probably tell you
> >>>> the place to increase the time out.
> >>>
> >>> That might not be the correct way to fix it, the problem is more
> >>> likely to be that the KDE libraries for Windows are not as stable
> >>> as those on *nix because they are less developed and there isn't
> >>> the effort available to improve the port.
> >>
> >> No, it is not the correct way to fix it or I would have sent a patch
> >> years ago. Yes literally 2 years ago. It is however a pragmatic way
> >> to get it to work right now. I know it will make it work as I tried
> >> it out back in 2010. My bug report will be 3 years old in January and
> >> there has been no movement on it since. Laurent said it was a big
> >> issue for him and Wolfgang would also like a fix and there must be
> >> many others not even on this list. I will not hold my breath while
> >> waiting for someone to fix it the correct way.
> >>
> >> You can say 'not our problem' as much as you like but the fact is
> >> that this bug is our problem as digiKam seems to be the only
> >> application to be badly affected by it. It is negatively affecting
> >> the users of digiKam on Windows and therefore harming the reputation
> >> of digiKam as a whole.
> >
> > Of course it is "our" problem, for some value of our. I'd like to see
> > digiKam work well on Windows too, but I have no way of fixing it myself
> > as I don't know the code at all. The question is, what is digiKam doing
> > differently from other KDE programs ported to Windows and is the
> > resulting problem something that needs fixing in the KDE ported
> > libraries or can it be fixed in digiKam itself? Until the exact reasons
> > are understood and a path to getting it fixed established then no one
> > seems to know what to do.
> >
> > I shall copy this to Ananta and see if he has anything to add, he knows
> > more than I do about this.
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> Digikam-users at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20121219/4ec347f7/attachment.html>