Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add set_tags_batch, set_tags + constructor takes added options #5

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

halloleo
Copy link

@halloleo halloleo commented Aug 1, 2012

Hi sven

Here my go at the set_tags feature:

new feature: methods set_tags_batch & set_tags allow to write metadata
tags to image files. implement a test for this in test_exiftool.py.

enhancement: constructor takes added options which get passed to the
stay-open instance of exiftool.

Cheers, Leo

ps: Please excuse if anything is strange in the code or in my github use. This is my first github check-in!

new feature: methods set_tags_batch & set_tags allow to write metadata
tags to image files. implement a test for this in test_exiftool.py.
enhancement: constructor takes added options which get passed to the
stay-open instance of exiftool.
@smarnach
Copy link
Owner

smarnach commented Aug 1, 2012

Thanks for your efforts – I really appreciate your suggestions and I will include both of the suggested features. However, I won't merge the patch as it is – I added a few remarks regarding the problems I see. Please allow for a few days to get this done. I have some patches ready for writing tags that still need tests, but I will use the addedargs feature from this patch.

halloleo added 2 commits August 2, 2012 11:17
`set_keywords_batch()` allows to modify the list of keywords in a image file by *replacing*, *adding* and *removing* keywords.
@halloleo
Copy link
Author

halloleo commented Aug 3, 2012

Hi Sven, I have added methods for keyword modification. Internally they don't use the JSON input, but that can be changed.

The mode constants KW_... are on the top level, not inside the object. I'm not sure whether that's the best choice.

Error checking is still fragile.

@alexbruy
Copy link

This pull request also solves issues #9 and #2

@mairsbw
Copy link

mairsbw commented Dec 1, 2016

Any plan to merging this or adding this functionality? It's been 3 years, so I assume no, but this would be very helpful to me.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants