| Summary: | Change versioning files naming for better workflow | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Applications] digikam | Reporter: | wuselwu <einmaladresse_2> |
| Component: | Database-Versioning | Assignee: | Digikam Developers <digikam-bugs-null> |
| Status: | REPORTED --- | ||
| Severity: | wishlist | CC: | caulier.gilles, fredericg_99, jk |
| Priority: | NOR | ||
| Version: | 4.9.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | openSUSE | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed In: | ||
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
|
Description
wuselwu
2011-04-25 09:36:40 UTC
> Naming: If I give a picture a name, I intend the name to stick. However, as
> soon as I edit a pic, the current version is given an appendix "_v1" or so.
> It would be much better if the most current version keeps its original
> name and the older versions get an appendix.
>
> Storage of older versions: Currently, older versions are hidden only in
> Digikam. If I use other programs to browse my pics (e.g. a media server to
> display them on TV), here I'm always confronted with all the older
> versions. There should be an option for an user-definable place to put the
> old versions.
Naming and storage directory are part of the same problem (and solution)
The code is prepared to have different naming schemes. I did not think of
renaming and moving the original, but inspecting the code it seems there is no
obstacle.
Initially, I had plans to allow scripts providing a custom naming scheme. It
appeared that the relevant parts were a bit more complex than expected, so I
prefer to have a closed set of options, possibly with some configuration.
There is a long discussion in some bug reports about naming schemes, without
any conclusive suggestions.
For a Digikam-user, usually it is quite easy to collaborate with other photo- and filemanagement-software. That's one of Digikam's (many) advantages, it does not take the pictures hostage, but all kinds of other programs can be used to access your photos. The current versioning implementation breaks this feature. E.g. for me it's quite annoying because, using a UPNP-server to stream photos to the home TV for watching them, gets you flooded with dozens of old versions of all the pics you were not really aware of. The file manager does no longer represent the stuff Digikam displays. And so on. For me, anything would be better than the current implementation, so I simply turned this basically useful feature off: Could you please point me to the relevant discussions? Because using a hidden subfolder or giving older photo version an unique name making it easy to filter them out seems like a simple solution to me. One is 103350, but there were other threads of discussion which I dont find atm. You dont need to read all of it; various layouts were suggested, including putting originals and intermediate results in a subfolder or not, patterns of filename changes Larx, This file still valid using last digiKam 4.10.0 ? Gilles Caulier As the way Digikam handles the versioning file names seems not to have changed at all, the bug is still valid - I simply do not use versioning to avoid cluttering my photo drawers with tons of *_v?.jpg files. Or am I missing a new preferences setting ?? However, I am still at 4.9, as openSUSE repos do not yet contain 4.10. *** Bug 397440 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 276708 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |