On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 14:08 +0100, Stephane Delcroix wrote: > Personally, and I think that's what the designer of that part had in > mind, I'm seeing tha Photos folder as a blackbox managed by f-spot. It > should have been a db or whatever, but thanks god it's a filesystem so, > if something goes wrong, I'll not loose my photos. This is getting a bit sidetracked from the original conversation, but this is something that annoys me, so I'll toss in my 0.02€. Its a bit of a twosided sword, the back end directory structure. On one hand, I do support the back end being a black box with f-spot as the front end, but on the other hand, for a lot of users, the directory structure is essentially meaningless without the front end. If for some reason a user wishes to stop using f-spot, he is left with a cumbersome directory structure of a sort he might not have created on his own. Surely many of you will agree that say 100 pictures from a four day trip are hard to browse using the file system, when they are spread into four folders corresponding to the day. A much more convinient, and logical, folder structure would be simply "YYYY-MM - Description of trip" for example, atleast IMO. Of course for random shots not belonging to a larger collection, the current method is fine, though cumbersome in some situations. Ideally I'd like to have the directory structure configurable. F-Spot could have a path name setting in preferences, with specified wildcards for year, month, date, a short description given on import, and so on. This would be similar to options provided in some CD ripping software, grip for example. With a feature like this provided, I personally would use a setting something like "<YYYY>/<MM> - <description>". Sorry for the rambling, JS -- Juha Sorensen <demosh kolumbus fi>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part