digiKam '97

[J Albrecht]

> On 16 Jan 2017, at 11:59, Dan Dascalescu <ddascalescu at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>  Is digiKam worth it?

Of course digiKam is worth the effort to bring its communication mechanism up to date by dragging it out of its arcane dark-age mailing list system.

However, I wouldn’t want to see progression on the important bits to be diverted because certain users are clamouring for this evolution. digiKam devs, keep up the great work! We appreciate it very much!  And, Giles’ open attitude to let somebody else run with the non-core changes which he outlined is also appreciated. Let’s see if somebody with the requisite skills and time takes the reins…
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20170116/c78fbed2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20170116/c78fbed2/attachment.sig>