Very true but it begs the question of generic picture management policy.
Posted Jun 28, 2010 20:53 UTC (Mon) by bjartur
In reply to: Very true but it begs the question of generic picture management policy.
Parent article: A quick grumpy review of Shotwell
It's a simple tradeoff:
- use the "right" solution (xattrs)
- Metadata will persist through changes and reorganization
- Other programs will be able to find and use metadata (file managers, (set|get)fattr).
- Not all filesystems support xattrs. Some hacks exist to store xattrs in filesystems that don't support them but do support some similiar concepts (e.g. NTFS alt.str.).
- use the "hacked" solution (seperate metadata files)
- Will work over e.g. NFS sans extra hacking
- Metadate won't persist through edits and reorganization. Hacks exists to make metadata persist through either (e.g. by comparing images to all existing images).
- Metadata won't be obviously "attached" to the related files.
- Directories get cluttered with metadata files or risk corruption of metadata of all imported files.
Personally, I'm a fan of xattrs as I like being able to move the files around without having to fire up a specific image-moving application and glancing over the images themselves rather than just telling sh to move all images taken in a certain timespan to a seperate folder and consider storing images in big library that makes exporting images to native filesystems necessary plain aweful.
to post comments)