Moving Baloo and Baloo-widgets into KDE SC

[Vishesh Handa]

On Thursday 09 Jan 2014 21:52:52 Christoph Feck wrote:
> On Thursday 09 January 2014 13:42:12 Vishesh Handa wrote:
> > Rough Update -
> > 
> > The migrator has been written and tested for files. The tags,
> > rating, comments and indexing configuration are properly migrated.
> 
> Is this a one-time migration, or continuous migration? In other words,
> if a user tags a file using an "unported" application, will he be able
> to integrate that data into an already migrated data base?
> 

It's a one time migration.


> We have no idea what custom applications a user may use to tag files
> and later expects to find these tags using all other applications.
> 

Then that user will be part of the 1% that has a sub-par experience in 
comparison to the 99% who are going to be much much happier in a world where 
virtuoso is not hogging up their CPU. I prefer concentrating on the most 
common use cases.

> > Considering that certain applications are still going to continue
> > using Nepomuk for sometime. The plan is to move most of
> > kde-runtime/nepomuk into its own repository which distributions
> > can then choose to ship.
> > 
> > The tags and timeline kioslave will be renamed to nepomuk-tags and
> > nepomuk- timeline respectively. This is being done to avoid
> > breaking the user experience, as 99% of the users will be
> > migrating to Baloo and will expect their tag/timline related
> > bookmarks to work as they did before.
> > 
> > With this I feel that distributions that think Nepomuk is still a
> > priority can ship the nepomuk-runtime repository which will allow
> > users to enable Nepomuk and use it.
> > 
> > Unless, someone still has objections I'll request a new repository
> > for nepomuk-runtime, and ask the system admins to move baloo into
> > kdesc.
> 
> I hope that we will be able to completely remove the Nepomuk API for
> the frameworks releases, and only use Baloo, because I trust you that
> Baloo offers better performance than Nepomuk.
> 

I haven't decided what we want to do with Nepomuk & Frameworks. I don't see 
the point of porting it.

> But if the above scenario does not work, we should probably not
> introduce Baloo for KDE SC 4.x.
> 

We'll have the same problem with KF5. Not all applications will immediately 
port to Qt5 and KF5, and some might just continue to use Nepomuk and not move 
to Baloo.


> Christoph Feck (kdepepo)
> KDE Quality Team

-- 
Vishesh Handa