[digiKam-users] Issue with {unique} in batch-rename

[Jack Marxer]

If there are duplicates and {unique}, why not number them with _01, _02,
_03, etcetera?
Jack

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 4:51 AM HaJo Schatz <hajo at hajo.net> wrote:

> Hi group,
>
> Not sure if this was discussed earlier, apologies if so. I can open a
> bug/feature request if not.
>
> Assume the following batch rename string:
> [date:yyyyMMdd-hhmmss]{unique}_Vacation
>
> If 3 photos have the same date/time they will be renamed as follows:
> DSC1:  20181029-130000_Vacation
> DSC2:  20181029-130000_1_Vacation
> DSC3:  20181029-130000_2_Vacation
>
> In alphabetic sorting (e.g. file manager), they will then be listed in the
> wrong order, since the unique numbers '1' & '2' are before the 'V' in the
> alphabet -- Pic 1 will be listed after Pic 2 & 3. I ran into this when
> trying to make an animated GIF recently.
>
> I think {unique} should add a _0 per default or, of course better yet, be
> aware if there's a conflict coming up and only add the _0 in such case.
>
> Oh, away from the affected computer now. But it's digikam on Fedora 28
> from the std repo, I must assume 5.9.0. Haven't checked 6.0.0 yet...
>
> Thx a lot,
> Hajo
>
> --
> PGP key: http://tinyurl.com/2016PGPKEY
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20181029/cc236ff9/attachment.html>