Permission to break feature freeze for Nepomuk and Soprano

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Monday 03 September 2007, Sebastian Trüg wrote:
> I was working heaviliy on Soprano2 [1]. It comes with a bunch of new
> features, a much cleaner API, a server/client architecture (quite simple
> but waaaay faster than DBus), and I intend to replace the Nepomuk

i have a handful of questions, not all of which impact the mergability of this 
but more just out of interest in N2 itself.

were there use cases for the dbus interface outside of nepomuk itself or was 
the use of DBus completely encapsulated within Nepomuk of uninteresting to 
the outside world? iow, will this cause a meaningful regression in 
interopability potential?

faster is better, but reliability is another important factor. is the 
client/server stuff completely specific to Nepomuk or did you build off of or 
on top of something that already existed elsewhere?

is there protocol documentation that comes with the new nepomuk so that review 
of it can occur without having to dive into source code?

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Trolltech
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20070903/4b272e7c/attachment.sig>