Nepomuk in 4.13 and beyond

[Todd]

On Dec 12, 2013 6:36 PM, "Vishesh Handa" <me at vhanda.in> wrote:
> >
> > i’ll say it again here so that it is at least on record: i really
disagree
> > with renaming Nepomuk. call it Nepomuk 2 or whatever, but tossing aside
> > name recognition and years of messaging is doing the promo teams a
massive
> > disservice.
> >
> > i hope that Baloo remains a technology name well hidden from both users
and
> > developers.
>
> It will remain hidden.

I am a bit confused by this. You say it will remain hidden, but the emails
I am seeing are calling for the outright removal of Nepomuk api calls and
replacing them with baloo API calls.  This does not seen very hidden from
developers.

Further, you talk about disabling Nepomuk in system settings.  This does
not seem very hidden from users.

So, although I cannot speak for him, I am not sure Aaron's branding
concerns are being addressed.

Now if this was keeping the Nepomuk namespace and billing baloo as a
replacement for virtuoso, then I could see this as being hidden, even with
substantial changes in how the APIs actually work.  But not when both APIs
and user settings are being renamed.

If any news site catches wind of this, I don't see how they could present
it as anything other than an outright abandonment of Nepomuk, and once that
view gets spread around the web no amount of branding later will change it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20131217/c120d740/attachment.htm>