[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       nepomuk
Subject:    Re: [Nepomuk] The Nepomuk Situation
From:       Sebastian_Trüg <trueg () kde ! org>
Date:       2012-05-16 18:32:39
Message-ID: 4FB3F2C7.8000008 () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

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.

> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Sebastian Tr=FCg <trueg@kde.org
> <mailto:trueg@kde.org>> 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 respe=
ct
>     to KDE5?
> =

>     Cheers,
>     Sebastian
> =

>     On 05/07/2012 03:58 PM, Sebastian Tr=FCg wrote:
>     > On 05/07/2012 03:47 PM, ivan.cukic@gmail.com
>     <mailto: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 Tr=FCg <trueg@kde.org
>     <mailto:trueg@kde.org>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> On 05/07/2012 02:35 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Sebastian Tr=FCg <trueg@kde.org
>     <mailto:trueg@kde.org>
>     >>
>     >>> <mailto:trueg@kde.org <mailto:trueg@kde.org>>> 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 plug=
in
>     >>> 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 <mailto:Nepomuk@kde.org>
>     > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
>     _______________________________________________
>     Nepomuk mailing list
>     Nepomuk@kde.org <mailto:Nepomuk@kde.org>
>     https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
> =

> =

> =

> =

> -- =

> Vishesh Handa
> =

_______________________________________________
Nepomuk mailing list
Nepomuk@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]