https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397340
--- Comment #13 from Eric <pub08-...@davor.org> --- (In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #12) > I do not know if this is your suggestion. I believe you and I are saying the same thing: if digiKam changes either the image file or its sidecar (or both), update the last-modified-time column in the database. (I agree that changing the other file's file-system last-modified-date should be avoided if possible.) > Now we can check if there is a new modification > date and start a scan. Yes. I guess I was mostly responding to gilles's comment: > What's happen if image change and not xmp sidecar, and if we write to xmp > side > car only ? This case cannot be managed ? If digiKam compares the database timestamp against *both* files' change dates, this stops being a problem. I.e. if either file is newer than the database timestamp, reread. Thus, if somebody else modifies the original file, digiKam will notice that -- even if digiKam itself is configured to only ever modify the sidecar. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
