What about couchdb? It comes with every ubuntu desktop now, and I thought there are some pre-built libs to make it easy to access. Plus, as for "peer to peer" stuff, that seems to be what couchdb was designed for. You can synch your couch to another one remotely over plain http. Plus, you might be able to hook into Ubuntu One easier (contacts and what not are already stored in couchdb for sync'ing with ubuntu one).
Just a thought. Doug On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Adam Dingle <[email protected]> wrote: > Take, > > thanks for your thoughts, and I'm glad that you like Shotwell overall! > It's true that Shotwell today is designed for the single-user case and > does not work well when your library is on an NFS share or when several > users run it on the same machine. Lots of users want to be able to > share photos easily on a local network (or across the Internet), and we > want to extend Shotwell to be able to handle that use case: see > http://trac.yorba.org/ticket/1292 . That might involve using a 'real' > database (e.g. MySQL) as you suggest and/or some sort of peer-to-peer > communication between Shotwell instances; we haven't yet decided exactly > how this will work. In any case, this feature won't be in the next > release (0.8) but I hope we'll get to it in the next few releases since > lots and lots of people want this. :) > > cheers > adam > > On 09/03/2010 12:33 AM, Take wrote: >> Hello. >> >> I recently installed shotwell and imported my photo directory. Even if >> shotwell isn't perfect (nor ready) yet I'm already quite impressed. >> Before this I haven't found any sofware which could've even managed to >> import my ~26000 photos. Here's some initial toughts of mine, I'm quite >> sure someone else has already suggested these, so if someone gets >> annoyed by 'repost' I'm sorry. >> >> However, even with shotwell there's this one design/ideology issue which >> isn't even near optimal on todays world. Every application, including >> shotwell, thinks that there's "My photos", not "Our photos". So, even if >> it's possible, the default setting is that there's no one else on same >> computer/network who'd want to access those family photos as well. >> >> Obviously that's a problem to balance between easy setup and additional >> features, but I'd really like to see support for some 'real' database in >> addition to sqlite. Currently I'm running shotwell on NFS-share, which >> kind-of-works, but I can't use shotwell simultaneously from multiple >> computers due to database access. The same scenario applies with >> multiuser-computer, since if user A has shotwell running and user B >> tries to open it in a new session it doesn't work either. >> >> Optimal solution would be to add setting/something for MySQL/PSql/Sqlite >> so that if user doesn't want (or can't) setup an real database sqlite >> would do and for "experienced" users it'd still be an option. >> >> >> Another issue I ran into, related to shared access, is that for some >> reason shotwell starts up _really_ slowly when I access database and >> photos over wifi-link& NFS. Startup takes several minutes and most of >> the time waiting there's little or no traffic at all on wlan0. I >> understand that ie. opening sqlite over slow(ish) link takes some time, >> but since there's no traffic I don't know what's taking so long. Startup >> progress goes up to 48% and stalls there for a good while. Most likely >> this would be solved with "real" database server instead of sqlite, but >> that's a bit annoying anyways. >> >> >> Anyways, keep up the good work! I really do like and appreciate the work >> of dev-team so far. Thank you all. >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Shotwell mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell > -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
