I think we can agree that one size does not fit all.
This applies for
1. Storage of the new files in whatever file naming pattern chosen by the user
(exif > filesystem/sqlite)
[I believe this is coming in 0.8]
or
2. Organizing existing files in library to match that pattern (exif/sqlite >
filesystem)
or
3. Extracting parameters (event name, etc.) based on filesystem info
(filesystem > sqlite/exif)
I don't see this as a problem, if it is done as optional approach based on a
checkbox or two.
It doesn't mean that the default can't be whatever the yorba team sees as the
most used scenario. Currently I see this as point 1 only.
Howeer, keep in mind that even iTunes has a setting to "keep my music
organized"
or "let me organize it myself". I believe in their case, it applies for all
music, not just new.
I am desperately waiting on 1 before I can switch over to use shotwell.
I personally would also see value in 2 and 3.
2) I have changed my mind about how I want the files organized every few
years. So there are slight variations on the structure of the files. It is
virtually impossible to restructure the old content manually. This will never
change unless it's automated.
3) My existing photo library (about 12 years / 200GB) have event name info
embedded in the folder names and/or filenames. It would be good if I didn't
have to redo all this work and it could be imported into Shotwell... the best
photo management app. :-) It is again virutally impossible to do this
manually.
2 & 3 can be somewhat alleviated by allowing file system view of the folders
that have been added to the library.
I believe the real intent of this topic is that if a user WANTS all 3 sources
of
data (exif/sqlite/filesystem) to be in sync, he/she should have that option
avaiable to them.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
Lu Timdale
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Shotwell mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
