Am 16.01.2016 um 23:26 schrieb Patrick Shanahan: > * Peter Mc Donough <mcd-mail-li...@gmx.net> [01-16-16 17:20]:
> And probably would not read digikam data anyway. And why bring digikam > and confusion into the thread. The question was about backing up > darktable's database with *no* mention of digikam. I'm sorry about that but information on a possible problem before it bites the user should be mentioned. The programs are there and will be used. So it is better to be aware of possible conflicts. > > And just for you, your method is quite convoluted and imnsho wasteful. > darktable has most of the same features as digikam for maintaining a photo > database, no real need to employe a second database and corrupt your xmp > files. Tagging with digikam is in my opinion very efficient compared to darktable unless you restrict the use of tags. I always have the original photos write-protected, so the problem is manageable if one is aware of it. Which means: After tagging with digikam you have to read the photos into darktable again. cu Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list Darktable-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
