Moving Baloo forward

Jos Poortvliet jospoortvliet at gmail.com
Fri Jan 17 19:17:23 GMT 2014


On Friday 17 January 2014 17:50:38 Vishesh Handa wrote:
> Hey Albert
> 
> Thanks for sending this email.
> 
> On Friday 17 January 2014 01:47:17 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > Hi guys, seems we have reached a kind of impasse regarding what to do
> > with
> > Baloo and Nepomuk. Since the 4.13 freeze is coming sooner than you think
> > (less than 6 weeks) I'd like to try to get it moving again.
> > 
> > Here comes my proposal:
> > 
> > Create a wiki where you clearly explain:
> >  * What is Baloo
> >  * Why Nepomuk is unfixable
> >  * What's the strategy of migrating Nepomuk data to Baloo
> >  * Can Nepomuk and Baloo run together? If so does data flow both ways? No
> > 
> > way? One way?
> > 
> >  * For each application that we know uses nepomuk
> >  
> >   - Is it going to be ported? When?
> >   - If not ported can it still run the same with nepomuk installed?
> >   - If not ported what's the harm if nepomuk is not installed?
> >  
> >  * What is the support plan for Baloo based in kdelibs4 once KF5 is
> > 
> > released?
> > 
> > I guess that most of the answers can be extracted from the emails of the
> > discussion, but having a central place that people can go and read surely
> > helps.
> 
> http://community.kde.org/Baloo
> 
> Could someone please prooof read this page and let me know where it can be
> improved?

Reading it from a outside-world-communication perspective :d

> > Now my personal opinion is that unless some of the answers are
> > catastrophic (i.e. something like "It will eat all your data") we should
> > move to Baloo as soon as possible.
> > 
> > For me the situation is this:
> >  * I accept the domain experts opinion that Nepomuk is unfixable
> >  * That means we need a replacement, Baloo
> >  * Baloo is [almost] ready
> >  * Baloo will have bugs (as all software does)
> > 
> > Now with this situation we can do two things:
> >  * Move to Baloo as soon as possible
> >  * Move to Baloo sometime in the future (let's say 1 year)
> > 
> > If we move now, in one year we will have had 1 year of real usage
> > uncovering bugs and 1 year of bugfixes.
> > 
> > If we move in one year, we will have lost that 1 year of real usage
> > (since
> > few people will be using it) and so in one year we will be in the same
> > situation as we are now. On top of that we have the possibility that the
> > Baloo guys have lost motivation
> > 
> > Thus my suggestion is that after we get the wiki done and we explain
> > clearly the situation as Thomas L├╝bking suggested (i.e. if you really
> > really really really need what Nepomuk provides and can't accept a
> > single regression in that field, do not upgrade), we go ahead with
> > moving to Baloo instead of Nepomuk.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> A huge +1.
> 
> I've sent an email to the kde-promo team asking them to help me with the
> article.

Will help where I can.

> Given that we're clearly informing the world - "Do not upgrade if you want
> to continue using Nepomuk", it does not make sense to still ship the
> Nepomuk KCM and kioslave. I will be removing them from kde-runtime.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20140117/a68626d6/attachment.sig>


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list