Re: The timestamp thing

[Aurélien Naldi <aurelien naldi gmail com>]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Steve McGrath <smcgrath23 gmail com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Let me first say that F-Spot has absolutely rocked for me for a few
> years now, and I won't use anything else.

Hi,

I have to say I also love f-spot :)

> That said, this ongoing timestamp issue is driving me nuts. I recently
> had to fix the timestamps on about 2,000 photos, some of which had been
> previously adjusted due to my camera being set wrong for a while. This
> caused much badness, completely hosed all my timestamps, and brought
> about the wailing and the gnashing of teeth.
>
[...]
>
> Also, I've heard of a couple patches for F-Spot which keep it from
> mucking about with my EXIF timestamps. Is there such a patch which is
> compatible with the latest version?

A while ago, I had a look at a branch for this. The patch was pretty
straightforward: remove all calls to the function responsible with
timestamp shifts.
If this branch has not yet been ported to the latest version, I hope
it is still simple enough to do it again.

While someone else raise this concern again, I would like to re-ask
wether there is a chance for upstream f-spot to make it easier for the
people willing to keep their timestamps sane without loosing tags.

A simple function, performing or not the timestamp shift depending on
an hidden gconf key would for example be lovely. It would be even
better if it could depend on the status of a checkbox in the import
dialog.

Indeed, even if the current behaviour is a feature, it can not
possibly be right to shift timestamps each time a picture is imported
(I happened to drop my f-spot DB several times to test tag imports and
other new features in the past...)

If such a patch has a chance to be accepted, I am willing to help with
the code, unless a better solution is in the work?

Best regards.

-- 
Aurélien Naldi