digikam default options

[Simon Frei]

That is why you should all forget about the "modification time issue" -
there is no issue there. Digikam does not rely on modification times
(except maybe for unsupported video files, but that is a limitation, not
a feature).

I don't see why you should care about modification timestamps, leave
this option at the default unless you have some very particular setup
that requires something else.

In the section "Write This Information to the Metadata" you choose which
information you want to keep in the metadata, so in the file itself. In
the section "Reading and Writing Metadata", where the option "Update
file timestamp when files are modified" is located, you configure how
this information should be written to the file. These are different
things entirely.

On 14/01/17 19:08, Chris Green wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 06:15:33PM +0100, jdd wrote:
>> Le 14/01/2017 à 16:51, Chris Green a écrit :
>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 07:14:54AM -0700, Andrey Goreev wrote:
>>>>    Wanted to add to my message below.
>>>>
>>>>    I think adding any info to metadata should not be considered as "file
>>>>    modifying". Why would you add any metadata? To get your pictures
>>>>    organized, right? So why would mess with timestamps then? Original
>>>>    timestamps should be preserved.
>>>>
>>> The *files* timestamp (there are three actually) is operating system
>>> information and is an indicator to the operating system and is used by
>>> other programs and the OS to manage the file.
>>>
>>> If I modify a file by changing the metadata I *do* want to change the
>>> timestamp because this tells the operatiny system (and other software)
>>> that the file has been modified and should, for example, be backed up.
>>> Quite a lot of backup programs in particular rely on the file
>>> timestamps to decide whether a file should be backed up.
>>>
>>> The times in the metadata are for use by such as Digikam.
>>>
>> two things:
>>
>> * digikam have to be more clear about what date is modified amoung all the
>> versions possible
>>
> Yes, a very good point.  For me I want Digikam to store *everything*
> in the file and not rely on any external information whether operating
> system or a separate database.  If I copy an image I want *all* its
> information to go with it.
>
>
>> * this may be quite hard, because *system* dates vary with file system.
>> Being linux or other, what are the dates kept on a FAT32 SD card?
>>
> Exactly, all the more reason not to rely on or use system dates as
> having any meaning for the image.
>