From kde-core-devel Wed May 16 20:07:00 2012 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sebastian_Tr=FCg?= Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:07:00 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: [Nepomuk] The Nepomuk Situation Message-Id: <4FB408E4.4080008 () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=133719900432523 On 05/16/2012 09:52 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: > > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Sebastian Trüg > wrote: > > > > On 05/16/2012 09:16 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Sebastian Trüg > > >> wrote: > > > > Pushed my stuff to branch "feature/nepomuk2Includes". > > > > Feel free to implement Ivan's fancier solution. In that case > my branch > > might at least help in finding the places where stuff needs > replacing. > > If you do not I would appreciate a look over my branch to > check if I > > missed sth. > > > > > > I will implement it, but not today. You'd missed one place. I've > > corrected it. > > > > So now you just need to use the same script on your scratch > > repositories. > > Well, if you want to implement Ivan's idea that should be applied to the > scratch repos, too. > > > Lets just get this done, before we try anything fancy. The hard feature > freeze is tomorrow. > > > > Also, do you know anything about translations? > > Hm, we should ask the l10n team about it before removing the code from > kde-runtime. > > > Probably. Do you want me to email everyone? (packagers, release-team and > i18n) > please. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Sebastian > > > > On 05/16/2012 08:37 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Sebastian Trüg > > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > > > On 05/16/2012 08:23 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: > > > > What about kdelibs/nepomuk/utils/* and the other ui stuff? > > > > > > > > Or since those are just APIs they can wait. > > > > > > I say let's postpone them, they are still in kdelibs. > > > > > > > > > The facets are quite weird and I am not sure about releasing > > them again. > > > The ui stuff - not sure. > > > > > > > > > We have all the runtime stuff and nepomuk-core, that's all that > > matters > > > right now. > > > > > > So, we just need to do - > > > > > > 1. use the Nepomuk2 namespace, and nepomuk2 include directory > > > 2. Remove kde-runtime/nepomuk > > > > > > Regarding 1, I like Ivan's suggestion about > > BEGIN_NEPOMUK_NAMESPACE. If > > > you want I can take care of it. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Sebastian Trüg > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > I now prepared the required repositories: > > > > > > > > scratch/trueg/nepomuk-kde-kio > > > > contains the 3 Nepomuk kio slaves > > > > > > > > scratch/trueg/nepomuk-kde-config > > > > contains the KCM and the controller systray app > > > > > > > > The question is: where should we move them? > Something like > > > "KDE/Base"? > > > > I suppose questions like these have already been > discussed > > > with respect > > > > to KDE5? > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Sebastian > > > > > > > > On 05/07/2012 03:58 PM, Sebastian Trüg wrote: > > > > > On 05/07/2012 03:47 PM, ivan.cukic@gmail.com > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >>> > wrote: > > > > >> Maybe there could be something like qt has - > > > > BEGIN_NEPOMUK_NAMESPACE... So that if the same > needs to > > be done in > > > > the future, we could just change the macro value. > > > > > > > > > > That would be much more work since each cpp file > has the > > > namespaces in > > > > > the method definitions. > > > > > > > > > >> I don't know, thinking that Nepomuk2 namespace > is looking > > > rather > > > > ugly :) > > > > > > > > > > it is indeed. > > > > > > > > > >> The dirtiest solution library-wise would be to have > > > everything in > > > > NepomukCore::Nepomuk::Something so that the only > change > > in the > > > > current code of nepomuk users would be a using > namespace > > > NepomukCore; > > > > >> > > > > >> Sorry for being a bit vague, I'm writing from > my phone. > > > > >> > > > > >> Cheerio, > > > > >> IvanOn 7.5.12. 14.49 Vishesh Handa wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Sebastian Trüg > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> On 05/07/2012 02:35 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Sebastian Trüg > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On 05/07/2012 12:09 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > So, we're down to 3 options - > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > *1.* nepomuk-core become a dependency of > kdelibs. > > > Kdelibs > > > > is not > > > > >>> touched. > > > > >>> > *Problem:* Overlapping headers and possible > > mysterious > > > > crashes if both > > > > >>> > libraries are loaded. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > *2.* nepomuk-core installs headers under > > nepomuk2. It's > > > > released > > > > >>> > independently. > > > > >>> > *Problem:* Mysterious crashes if both > > libraries are > > > loaded. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > *3.* nepomuk-core installs headers under > nepomuk2 > > > and the > > > > namespace is > > > > >>> > changed to nepomuk2. > > > > >>> > *Problem:* A lot more work :( > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Well, I suppose we could make this work with > > some sed > > > magic. :P > > > > >>> I would vote for option 3 which could then be > > reverted (or > > > > not) for > > > > >>> kde5. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I would prefer option 2. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> The mysterious crashes would only happen if an > > > application's plugin > > > > >>> links to the incorrect libraries. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Is that a possibility for us? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> I already experienced that. Took me a while to find > > the reason. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Alright. > > > > >> > > > > >> I would like the Nepomuk2 namespace and include > > directories be > > > > removed for the frameworks, but I guess it is not > a big deal > > > if that > > > > doesn't happen. > > > > >> > > > > >> ---- > > > > >> > > > > >> Okay, everyone. This is the point where you > chime in > > and say - > > > > "We're okay with this" or you raise your > objections. We > > would like > > > > to get this mess sorted in time for the 4.9 release. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Nepomuk mailing list > > > > > Nepomuk@kde.org > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Nepomuk mailing list > > > > Nepomuk@kde.org > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Vishesh Handa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Vishesh Handa > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Vishesh Handa > > > > > > > -- > Vishesh Handa >