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

List:       nepomuk
Subject:    Re: [Nepomuk] Dolphin and NepomukCore
From:       Peter Penz <peter.penz19 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2012-10-16 11:16:46
Message-ID: CAE6_Y8ZgZm+AQ76FVwhxqe2U3rehksuoB_K75WmP4Kdhi-++AQ () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


Hi David,

2012/10/16 David Faure <faure@kde.org>

> On Monday 15 October 2012 17:16:39 Frank Reininghaus wrote:
> > The hate is exactly the reason why I'm sceptical about removing the
> > "Nepomuk off" option
>
> Why? Didn't Peter say that the widget showed *nothing*, currently when
> nepomuk
> is off at compile time? So such users wouldn't lose anything.
>
> Or am I mixing up two configurations?
>

Yes, I think you are mixing up the two configurations ;-) With my
suggestion to think about removing the "Nepomuk off" option I meant: As
soon as Nepomuk is available at compile-time it should be enabled. In this
case the users may still disable the "indexing" but would not be able
anymore to disable Nepomuk itself.

So instead of having four code-paths like now:
- (1) No Nepomuk available at compiletime
- Nepomuk available at compiletime:
  -- (2) Nepomuk off, indexing off
  -- (3) Nepomuk on, indexing off
  -- (4) Nepomuk on, indexing on

we would have "only" three:
 - (1) No Nepomuk available at compiletime
- Nepomuk available at compiletime:
  -- (2) Nepomuk on, indexing off
  -- (3) Nepomuk on, indexing on

Cheers,
Peter

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Hi \
David,</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
 <br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><div \
class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
 <div class="im" style="color:rgb(80,0,80)">2012/10/16 David Faure <span \
dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:faure@kde.org" target="_blank" \
style="color:rgb(17,85,204)">faure@kde.org</a>&gt;</span><br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px \
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
 <div>On Monday 15 October 2012 17:16:39 Frank Reininghaus wrote:<br>&gt; The hate is \
exactly the reason why I&#39;m sceptical about removing the<br>&gt; &quot;Nepomuk \
off&quot; option<br><br></div>Why? Didn&#39;t Peter say that the widget showed \
*nothing*, currently when nepomuk<br> is off at compile time? So such users \
wouldn&#39;t lose anything.<br><br>Or am I mixing up two \
configurations?<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Yes, I think you are mixing \
up the two configurations ;-) With my suggestion to think about removing the \
&quot;Nepomuk off&quot; option I meant: As soon as Nepomuk is available at \
compile-time it should be enabled. In this case the users may still disable the \
&quot;indexing&quot; but would not be able anymore to disable Nepomuk itself.</div> \
<div><br></div><div>So instead of having four code-paths like now:</div><div>- (1) No \
Nepomuk available at compiletime</div><div>- Nepomuk available at \
compiletime:</div><div>  -- (2) Nepomuk off, indexing off</div><div>  -- (3) Nepomuk \
on, indexing off</div> <div>  -- (4) Nepomuk on, indexing \
on</div><div><br></div><div>we would have &quot;only&quot; three:</div><div> - (1) No \
Nepomuk available at compiletime</div><div>- Nepomuk available at \
compiletime:</div><div>  -- (2) Nepomuk on, indexing off</div> <div>  -- (3) Nepomuk \
on, indexing on</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Peter</div></div>



_______________________________________________
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]