Re: Breaking changes in file layout

> For such an integral value, this should really be in the root node:
> <KPhotoAlbum version="8" compressed="1" collectionId="05461613-
> f3ff-4d03-953a-718b7347b749">
> or:
> <KPhotoAlbum version="8" compressed="1" collectionId="Pictures">

<KPhotoAlbum version="8" compressed="1" collectionId="05461613-
f3ff-4d03-953a-718b7347b749">

looks perfectly fine to me. An auto-generated value would have the benfit of
most probably not creating collisions and the user doesn't have to interact.
It would be like before. We can also add it silently via a db version update,
still being backwards-compatible and not breaking anything. Additionally, I
think one can assume that the "name" of the collection is the chosen directory
name, so having a human-readable collection name would not add benefit to the
user.

> Apart from the camel-case name I see no reason not to do this. I'd call it
> ".kphotoalbum-data".
> My initial thought right now was "but index.xml should remain at the current
> location", but the more I think about it the less sure I am. Thoughts?

If you are concerned about the CamelCase, we should consequently also call
CategoryImages category-images or such I think. Apart from that: Why not
<DBDIR>/.kphotoalbum-data. Without the dot, it would be clear at first sight
that KPA adds data in there for the user, but I'm totally fine with the dot
version.

Tobias