Re: GSD should not housekeep the thumbnails

> I don't think f-spot needs to abandon the whole thumbnail spec. That's a 
> bit dramatic.
We'd prefer not. Whatever the way we handle the thumbs, inside or
outside of the specification, it's gonna take a lot of space
> It's no big deal to modify the default MAX_AGE and MAX_SIZE settings to 
> something that people consider "sane". Suggestions? Right now it's 60 
> days and 64 MB, but I have no problem increasing them if there is a 
> consensus. Would 6 months / 512 MB be more sane? (f-spot could provide a 
> UI to adjust these.)
Whatever the MAX_AGE, at the time you're passing the threshold, you're

About providing a UI, we're not in favor of that. A decent solution
could be to prompt the user with a UI like "the f-spot thumbs cache is
taking 90% of the thumbnail allowed space. Grow that threshold by
200% ?"

> Deleting thumbnails for files that no longer exist is not practical.
> You 
> would have to read every thumbnail file to extract the png txt that 
> identifies the original uri, then check that uri. Very slow. Plus,
> some 
> people will not appreciate losing thumbnails for transient network 
> shares or CDs/DVDs.
same for network uri like http;// ftp://

for more info on what the spec says about a possible cleaning tool as
implemented by the housekeeping
plugin :


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]