https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473418
--- Comment #2 from Felix Esch <felix.esc...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #1) > The output suffix in the user script has nothing to do with the capabilities > that digiKam supports. Your script must be able to generate a corresponding > file. In theory, we can replace it with a custom field. > > Maik True, in my case a custom suffix would be a viable solution. Thinking this further, there could even be useful custom processing scripts that do not generate a new output file for each input file (which would currently generate an error message in the BQM), but this seems to be out of scope for this plugin. I'm just a casual user of digiKam anyway. Felix -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
