New digikam website source available from KDE's git server

[Dmitri Popov]

It's a good idea only if someone will keep the videos updated. The
pace of digiKam's development will make most videos outdated in a
matter of months, and having obsolete videos on the website doesn't
make a good impression.

Best,
Dmitri

On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Andrey Goreev <aegoreev at gmail.com> wrote:
> On a separate note I would like to suggest adding some videos of how digiKam
> works.
> If something simple will do (record screen, add some text comments and
> background music) I can help with that.
> I guess we would need to determine the top 5-10 features first.
>
>
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Pat David <patdavid at gmail.com>
> Date: 2017-04-01 6:56 AM (GMT-07:00)
> To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power
> of open source <digikam-users at kde.org>
> Subject: Re: New digikam website source available from KDE's git server
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:19 PM Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On the download section, there are too much text to read to find the right
>> version.
>
>
> Agreed!  This is one of the pages I was hoping to rewrite soon to be a
> little clearer.  I had written some small OS detection script I use on
> www.gimp.org to show the most likely relevant download to users when they
> visit the page - I could possibly re-use that here if you wanted.
>
> Either way, the page is on the to-do list to re-write to be more direct and
> clear. :)
>
>
>>>
>>> To resume :
>>>
>>> - screenshots stored in local or not ?
>>> - If stored in local (git), this is acceptable by KDE team to overload
>>> the repository with this kind of huge data ?
>
>
> Re: Screenshots
>
> I know that historically you've hosted your photos on Flickr.  This is fine,
> but I would personally suggest hosting them locally if possible.
>
> The reason is that if Flickr, for any reason, goes dark - then you'll have a
> huge amount of dead images across your site.  I'd hate for that to happen!
> Even worse, if the images aren't stored anywhere else then there's a chance
> you'll lose the mapping of what those images should be. :(
>
> In git, we'll have them and won't have to worry about it (and we don't have
> to worry about a database not liking them on the backend anymore).
>
> I don't think there's a _huge_ amount of files/sizes to worry about, but I
> guess it's up to Ben to let us know if that'll be ok.
>
> pat
> --
> https://patdavid.net
> GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D  18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC