[KPhotoAlbum] A few stacking issues

[Johannes Zarl]

On Friday 25 January 2013 01:42:58 Robert Krawitz wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 01:38:22 +0100, Johannes Zarl wrote:
> > On Friday 25 January 2013 01:11:32 Robert Krawitz wrote:
> > Well, it doesn't make the behaviour more useful for you, but it also
> > means that the real bug lies with the autostacking-problems you
> > mentioned. If autostacking worked properly for you, you wouldn't need
> > the workaround. I just don't want to dig into this problem, if I'll
> > realize later that the problem lies somewhere else ;-)
> 
> That's not so.  Sometimes I may want the JPEG and sometimes I may want
> the RAW, depending upon what I'm doing.

I didn't want to imply that your "ideal workflow" is unreasonable. But the 
current "intended behaviour" is for the export to use the top-image of each 
stack. If KPA is not doing that, than that would be a bug.

If you want KPA to do things differently (e.g. ask the user for each stack 
which image to select), then that is a feature request, and honors a 
discussion asking questions like "how does it affect other users with 
different workflows?" or "is somebody willing to implement it?".

> (Also, if the purpose is to be able to populate a foreign database, it
> really should be exporting *all* files in the stack.)

This was a deliberate design choice (there was a discussion on this list a 
while back, but I don't remember the exact date).

The idea behind this behaviour is the following:
a) If someone wants to export/run a kipi-plugin on only the "top images" (i.e. 
the unstacked images + the top images of the stacks), one can do so by just 
selecting the unexpanded stacks.
b) If someone wants to export/run a kipi-plugin on all images, then one can do 
so by first selecting "expand all stacks".

If the export automatically expanded the stacks, use-case a) would break.

Theoretically it would be possible to add a dialog that pops up and asks if 
one would like to expand the stacks. But that would mean an additional dialog 
for most people that don't want the behaviour in the first place, and somebody 
would have to implement it.

I hope that clears things up a bit,
  Johannes