[Digikam-users] Folders, albums and collections

Gilles Caulier caulier.gilles at gmail.com
Fri Jun 19 09:45:23 BST 2015

Very dangerous... really.

Not more than Another GUI abstraction layer which will be less
understandable by end users.

It's logic to see WHERE are files on computer. This is not a weird design,
but how computer users play with it since a lots of decades. This is also a
design that digiKam users want from the start.

Ex :

iPhoto/Aperture : where are files ??? Copied and cached into private
KPhotoAlbum : there is no FS view.

You don't care about FS view. No problem with digiKam. Create a collection,
put all images on the root as well, and start to sort/group items in
virtual albums named Tags.

Go to Tags album view and you will have same behaviors than iPhoto like

Gilles Caulier

2015-06-19 10:30 GMT+02:00 Agustin Lobo <alobolistas at gmail.com>:

> First, this is a design suggestion, yes. And designing according to
> user's experiences is the most fundamental advantage
> for developers of OSS. Your view of "you like it, you use it; you
> don't like it, use something else" is, besides being unnecessarily
> rude ,  totally opposed to OSS philosophy.
> Second, I was obviously referring to file management. Obviously, the
> editing tasks must change files. But this would rarely be
> an unintended action (although Digikam has the means of protecting the
> user of eventual errors in this case), while
> deleting an Album while thinking  you are deleting just something
> internal to Digikam can easily happen.
> Agus
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Remco Viƫtor <remco.vietor at wanadoo.fr>
> wrote:
> > On Friday 19 June 2015 09:41:30 Agustin Lobo wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> > Isn't that a design decision? And digikam went one way, you prefer
> > another... Perhaps Darktable would be more to your taste.
> >
> > And also, if Digikam 'deal[s] with managing its database only', how are
> you
> > going to cull the images that are blurred, or just not good enough to
> keep?
> >
> > Remco
> > _______________________________________________
> > Digikam-users mailing list
> > Digikam-users at kde.org
> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150619/006a2c9b/attachment.html>

More information about the Digikam-users mailing list