Exiv2 bug reports

[aegoreev at gmail.com]

I think we need to leave exiv2 as is for still images and find something else 
for video files if possible...
There are many options for video files out there. I have dealt with:

mediainfo ( I have used it for reading but I am not sure if it can write)

ffmpeg (I use it for conversion/compression but I know it can read/write 
metadata. mediainfo seems to be able to read better IMHO. I have not checked 
its all metadata writing capabilities)

bento4 (I use it to move "xyz" atoms from originals to compressed files because 
they get lost during ffmpeg compression. [This is a bug of ffmpeg but I don't 
think it will be fixed soon.] This allows me to see the videos on the map on my 
Samsung Android phone. I haven't checked all the capabilities of that tool 
though.)

Once we know what we want to do for video files I can volunteer and check every 
single tool availble on the web and come up with some kind of report.


On Sunday, April 9, 2017 12:17:24 PM MDT Gilles Caulier wrote:
> I'm back to this subject.
> 
> I receive a mail from Exiv2 forum few days ago. This become more and more
> critical for the future of Exiv2 :
> 
> http://dev.exiv2.org/boards/3/topics/2829
> 
> I don't know where is the problem exactly in Exiv2 team. Even if Exiv2 0.26
> is released, i fear to see a very long time before a next 0.27 release with
> video support bugfixes, as i hope.
> 
> So we need a solid alternative... The only one is Exiftool of course. I see
> these possible problem to use it in digiKam:
> 
> - Exiftool is Perl based program, not a lox level library. For each action
> to perform with metadata, we need to create a process. this is time
> consuming in a muti-threaded application as digiKam.
> 
> - Exiftool can be compiled as binary program for the target and It need to
> be embedded in digiKam as ressource. This is a little bit complicated to
> do. Even if we do it fro the bundle, the distro based version will still as
> a script. Performance will be low, i'm sure...
> 
> - Exiftool syntax to play with metadata tags is completely different than
> Exiv2. The port will be long and regression tests an hell...
> 
> Voilà. I'm not yet investigated better for the moment. This kind of change
> in digiKam core is a very important stage, so, a good analysis of the
> possibilities need to be done before to start something in source code.
> 
> Gilles Caulier
> 
> 2017-03-30 11:43 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles at gmail.com>:
> > There is some way that we can experiment, but i don't yet found enough
> > time to code something suitable for the moment.
> > 
> > It still in my TODO list.
> > 
> > Gilles Caulier
> > 
> > 2017-03-30 11:23 GMT+02:00 NeiNei <neinei at gmx.net>:
> >> Hi Gilles,
> >> 
> >> just wanted to get back on the question of the suitability of the C++
> >> Interface for ExifTool for DigiKam. Perhaps you have found some time
> >> already to take a look at it?
> >> 
> >> Best,
> >> NeiNei
> >> 
> >> On 11.03.2017 18:59, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> >>> Effectively, it's interesting. I will take a look...
> >>> 
> >>> Gilles Caulier
> >>> 
> >>> 2017-03-11 18:09 GMT+01:00 Andrey Goreev <aegoreev at gmail.com
> >>> 
> >>> <mailto:aegoreev at gmail.com>>:
> >>>     Can this help ?
> >>>     
> >>>     http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/cpp_exiftool/
> >>>     <http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/cpp_exiftool/>
> >>>     
> >>>     
> >>>     Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> >>>     
> >>>     -------- Original message --------
> >>>     From: Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles at gmail.com
> >>>     <mailto:caulier.gilles at gmail.com>>
> >>>     Date: 2017-03-11 9:17 AM (GMT-07:00)
> >>>     To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with
> >>>     the power of open source <digikam-users at kde.org
> >>>     <mailto:digikam-users at kde.org>>
> >>>     Subject: Re: Exiv2 bug reports
> >>>     
> >>>     
> >>>     
> >>>     2017-03-11 16:48 GMT+01:00 Andrey Goreev <aegoreev at gmail.com
> >>>     
> >>>     <mailto:aegoreev at gmail.com>>:
> >>>         What tool is creating xmp sidecar files for the video files at
> >>>         the moment? Exiv2 ?
> >>>     
> >>>     yes
> >>>     
> >>>         But anyways, there has to be something else in the FOSS world
> >>>         that can handle the job.
> >>>         
> >>>         Video format is just too different from the image format so it
> >>>         is tough to find a tool that can handle both very well. Exiftool
> >>>         came pretty close to that but it still lacks of ability to write
> >>>         many of tags.
> >>>     
> >>>     Exiftool is perl based, not C++
> >>>     
> >>>     Gilles Caulier