From kde-promo Tue Feb 18 20:09:21 2014 From: Jos Poortvliet Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:09:21 +0000 To: kde-promo Subject: Re: [kde-promo] Article about Baloo Message-Id: <1939220.HCIo5NsEJP () linux-606j> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-promo&m=139275386031054 MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--===============5566612925126742544==" --===============5566612925126742544== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart14512695.lAeeeEi2j5"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --nextPart14512695.lAeeeEi2j5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Tuesday 18 February 2014 15:24:32 Stuart Jarvis wrote: > On Tuesday 18 February 2014 15:51:50 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 14:20:57 Stuart Jarvis wrote: > > > On Tuesday 18 February 2014 14:54:04 Jos Poortvliet wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 18 February 2014 14:30:13 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > Lets not quibble on semantics. > : > :-D to getting 'semantics' into the email. Ok, let's leave that point= > :there.: > > Nepomuk undeniably has visibility. Keeping continuity in that would= have > > made a number of things rather more simple going forward. > >=20 > > > In this particular case, there are some major things changing - i= t's a > > > big > > > switch that might leave some applications currently needing Nepom= uk. > > > I'm > > > not > >=20 > > Given that Nepomuk is being left behind by the developers who were > > working > > on it, this seems inadvisable. As yet another cost in the renaming > > exercise, we now have developers who will more likely feel the need= to > > spend time examining the change and whether to adopt or not rather = than > > simply accepting it as the next step in this technology=E2=80=99s l= ife cycle. > >=20 > > > sure it can be done completely unannounced, with no public change= (in > > > name/terminology). > >=20 > > It should be announced; it=E2=80=99s the change in naming and termi= nology that is > > at issue. >=20 > Ok, I misunderstood you. >=20 > > > It could be done perhaps with a Nepomuk v1 versus > > > Nepomuk v2 kind of distinction (hey, maybe that would have been > > > better). I > >=20 > > That=E2=80=99s actually what I suggested previously. > >=20 > > > too think it's late for that now - particularly as the name Baloo= is > > > out > > > there (from use on the mailing list, apparently) - but I'm willin= g to > > > be > > > convinced. > >=20 > > I=E2=80=99m not sure it is too late; Baloo could be positioned as t= he =E2=80=98backend=E2=80=99 > > for Nepomuk storage, in much the same way as strigi was replaced wi= th a > > Nepomuk- specific solution, and Nepomuk 2 could be =E2=80=98born=E2= =80=99. >=20 > That would be rather easy to do, within the existing draft article. I= t > would be little more than replacing 'Nepomuk' in many places with > 'Nepomuk's existing storage backend'. >=20 > The one sticking point is the part of the article where we talk about= > migration of data and the possibility (not advised) of running both > systems, but that can be dealt with in a similar way, particularly if= > migration is automated >=20 > In short, the more I think about it (and think about counter argument= s) I'm > coming round to your point of view. Except that I don't think mention= ing > version 1 vs version 2 (for example) makes sense, because 'Nepomuk' h= ere > is not so much the software as the concept/capability for semantic se= arch > etc, as it was in the original research project - instead talk of bac= kends > seems cleaner. >=20 > In that case, the title might be: > "KDE Unveils Next Generation Semantic Search Backend" >=20 > I'd still be inclined to mention Baloo by name in the article, but po= sition > as "the new backend to semantic search, replacing Nepomuk's existing > backend". >=20 > Jos, Carl, others - what are your thoughts? To me, it sounds like a 'have your cake and eat it too' solution. I alw= ays=20 like those. The article already mentions that the API's and widgets are= =20 simply taken from Nepomuk. For application developers and many users th= ey are=20 the FACE of Nepomuk. So, we kept Nepomuk. The backend is changed - from= =20 Virtuoso to an abstraction layer called Baloo. Sounds like good spin if you ask me ;-) > > If it is deemed =E2=80=9Ctoo late=E2=80=9D, then we can at least le= arn from this so that > > in future things are handled differently. >=20 > Yep. Yes, whatever we do - that is something I think we all agree on. --nextPart14512695.lAeeeEi2j5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAlMDvfEACgkQ+wgQ1AD35iw1YQCdE+X3sFiDrzyXZu+ZIMFAHo1j aXIAmwf6YwQNsuGz/iuLkTb8z06PCCCd =XFPb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart14512695.lAeeeEi2j5-- --===============5566612925126742544== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ This message is from the kde-promo mailing list. Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on or temporarily stop your subscription. --===============5566612925126742544==--