[Nepomuk] The Nepomuk Situation

[Vishesh Handa]

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Sebastian Trüg <trueg at kde.org> 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 <trueg at kde.org
> > <mailto:trueg at 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
> respect
> >     to KDE5?
> >
> >     Cheers,
> >     Sebastian
> >
> >     On 05/07/2012 03:58 PM, Sebastian Trüg wrote:
> >     > On 05/07/2012 03:47 PM, ivan.cukic at gmail.com
> >     <mailto:ivan.cukic at 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 <trueg at kde.org
> >     <mailto:trueg at kde.org>> wrote:
> >     >>
> >     >> On 05/07/2012 02:35 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote:
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >     >>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Sebastian Trüg <trueg at kde.org
> >     <mailto:trueg at kde.org>
> >     >>
> >     >>> <mailto:trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at 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
> 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 at kde.org <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org>
> >     > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Nepomuk mailing list
> >     Nepomuk at kde.org <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org>
> >     https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Vishesh Handa
> >
>



-- 
Vishesh Handa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20120517/69c474ba/attachment.htm>