[Digikam-users] Folders, albums and collections

Daniel Bauer linux at daniel-bauer.com
Fri Jun 19 09:19:25 BST 2015

Am 19.06.2015 um 09:41 schrieb Agustin Lobo:
> Very dangerous. I suggest that, in the future, all Albums be virtual.
> That is, initially you get Albums matching folders, but removing
> Albums should not
> imply removing folders. Removing folders should be done by using the OS. Digikam
> should deal with managing its database only.
> Note that for most users (specially novice users) having Albums and
> Virtual Albums can be confusing,
> and they could easily think that they are removing a virtual Album
> while they are removing a folder... with its pictures.
> Agus

No, I do not agree at all.

That digikam reflects the directories and files just naturally, as they 
are in the file system, is one of its great advantages. It makes 
everything more transparent and easy to maintain. One can 
use/move/add/delete folders and files also outside of digikam using the 
file system or saving from an other application (like gimp etc.) into 
folders/albums. Backup is easy too, this way.

If I delete an image or a folder I want to have it deleted. It's my 
computer, not facebook or google.

I don't want "deleted" and deleted things, and in the end not knowing if 
something is really deleted or not, respectively having to use another 
application to clean up and synchronize file system with "virtual 
stuff". I don't want to have other folder names than those that 
physically appear on my HD.

A virtual album view would be another layer, making things even more 
complicated. More database access, slower, more possibilities for errors 
and bad synchronization... no, thanks.

No no, just keep it as is, digikam!


Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Barcelona
room in Barcelona: https://www.airbnb.es/rooms/2416137

More information about the Digikam-users mailing list