On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 11:42:00AM +0300, Take wrote: > The solution I had in mind doesn't involve any kind of "sync", since > files are on NFS/Samba/whatever and database connection is made via an > actual TCP-socket (ie. MySQL). This way any computer on (local) network > could access the files and database simultaneously. > > IMO there should anyways be just one shared storage for actual files, > since, as you know, it's quite huge PITA to maintain sync for multiple > storages.
That's one usage model. In my case I like to sync files to my laptop using "unison" - I have fast off-line access to them, and it acts as a backup. Having the tags within the image files would probably be the best fit for me, even though retagging a photo would cause unison to copy the whole file across. Each side would have to notice when a file had changed, and update its database accordingly. To take things to the other extreme: use couchdb, not only for the metadata, but for the photos themselves (as binary attachments). You could then point shotwell either at a local couchdb instance, or a remote couchdb server. It solves the separation of images from metadata, and backup to UbuntuOne would be a bonus. Unfortunately, whatever you do isn't going to please everyone :-( Regards, Brian. _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
