Re: [Gimp-user] Digikam raw files and darktable

[Andrey Goreev <aegoreev gmail com>]

I agree 100% but digikam devs have their own point of view on how the program should look like and we need to 
respect it.
This is how fork projects appear. If it is not too complicated to replace libraw with darktable a fork could 
be not a bad idea.
Someone will have to maintain it though, new versions of both digikam and darktable come out pretty 
frequently.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------From: Juan Jose Casafranca <jjcasmar gmail com> Date: 2017-01-13  8:29 AM  
(GMT-07:00) To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power of open source 
<digikam-users kde org> Cc: gimp-user-list gnome org, darktable-user <darktable-user lists darktable org> 
Subject: Re: Digikam raw files and darktable 
Thanks Albrecht, that's exactly my opinion and the reason I want to develop this module :-)
2017-01-12 15:15 GMT+01:00 J Albrecht <heviiguy gmail com>:

On 07 Jan 2017, at 09:41, Juan Jose Casafranca <jjcasmar gmail com> wrote:
They need a way to organize 
their library, which DK is good at, and a way to process raw files, which DT is 
good at (DK is not a good raw processor and DT is not good for library 
management).
For the Developer’s benefit, I’d like to reiterate the above statement: digiKam is a brilliant program but 
please, let’s maintain the focus on where it is brilliant rather than trying to craft it into an 
all-singing-all-dancing piece of bloatware comprising relatively mediocre modules just for the sake of doing 
so. In the FOSS realm, digikam is an excellent Digital Asset Management program, darktable is, IMHO, the best 
Raw editor and GIMP is unparalleled for post-processing. It’s folly and perhaps a bit arrogant to assume that 
Users would willingly be hobbled by using only one program simply because they are “loyal” to that program.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could just all get along….