[KimDaBa] Re: [Gwenview-general] kimdaba: why not join forces with gwenview
ach at mpe.mpg.de
Sun Feb 15 20:27:32 GMT 2004
On Thursday 12 February 2004 09:12, Jesper K. Pedersen wrote:
> Aurelien Gateau <aurelien.gateau at free.fr> writes:
> | Le mercredi 11 Février 2004 22:57, Jesper K. Pedersen a écrit :
> | > Sorry for the late reply.
> | >
> | > Well I think it would be pretty hard to do.
> | > Of course you are very welcome to borrow code from me, and I'll even offer
> | > to answer any questions you may have, but you have to realize that a large
> | > part of KimDaBa is about these extra informations. Lets take the viewer for
> | > one thing. Sure KimDaBa could use an external viewer (say Gwenview), but it
> | > would require that this viewer would be capable of showing the infobox, and
> | > be capable of letting the user draw on the images.
> | >
> | > I don't really see a complete merge of the two projects, if for no
> | > other reason, then simply because I've worked more than a year on this
> | > project, and it means much more to me that just having a cool
> | > application. For one thing, should I ever seek a new job, showing KimDaBa
> | > and telling that I'm the mastermind behind this would help a lot.
> | I see your point. I plan to add a simple category system to Gwenview, maybe I
> | could store them in the same way you store your information. This way a user
> | would be able to use both applications, depending on his need. I don't know
> | if it's technically feasible though.
> That would of course be a very good idea.
> | > One place where we could work together would be on a plugin
> | > structure. Imagine we could have a common plugin structure where people
> | > could write plugins for both programs.
> | >
> | > I'm planning on working on a plugin structure for KimDaBa starting this
> | > weekend (just after KimDaBa 1.1 has been released), and I'll ensure to
> | > document it, and make it as general as possible, so you might be able to
> | > reuse it if you see fit. One thing I'll also look into is if its possible
> | > to make the plugin structure compatible with digikam's.
> | That's a good idea, but maybe you can use the Digikam plugin system instead of
> | creating your own compatible one?
> Well KimDaBa do contain much more information, so I need some extension
> compared to digikam, on the other hand I do not have a concept of albums,
Call the collection of images matching the search criteria a 'virtual
> so the system can't be completely the same
Yes, but for another reason. digikam plugin interface currently
leaks the implementation of albums is a folder. But with an adaption
(or redesign) there no reason why the plugins system can be extended
adapted to fit the need of kimdaba, digikam, gwenview ...
Only problem can be developers not discussing with each other ;)
> KimDaBa mailing list
> KimDaBa at klaralvdalens-datakonsult.se
To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is
a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated.
You discover truth everytime you use it.
-- reddy at lion.austin.ibm.com
More information about the Kphotoalbum