[Nepomuk] Re: same nepomuk db for several users

[Vishesh Handa]

Hi!

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Markus Leuthold <nepomuk at titlis.org> wrote:

> > On 12/02/2010 01:24 AM, Markus Leuthold wrote:
> > > Hello list
> > >
> > > We share our computer among several persons, each with a separate user
> > > account. We want to have a shared nepomuk database. What's the best way
> > > to do this? Creating a symlink of ~/.kde/share/apps/nepomuk to a shared
> > > folder?
> > >
> > > best regards
> > > Kusi
>
> > This is tricky. It could be hacked with links indeed. But then no two
> > users could ever be logged in at the same time.
> > Why do you want to share the database?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Sebastian
>
> There are many possible use-cases for sharing tags. Some real-world
> examples:
>
> - me and my girlfriend are planning our vacation. She's tagging documents,
> pictures etc with the tag "vacation-2010". In my account, I'd like to see
> now
> what is already available when I'm organizing our vacations in my account.
>
>
In today's world, wouldn't your girl-friend and you have separate computers?
I'm just saying that I think it would a lot-lot easier for us to work
towards metadata sharing, rather than focusing on having a common Nepomuk
db.

- we're preparing a playlist for a party. We'd like to set the tag "party-
> playlist" in dolphin, running in each one's account. Since we're in a
> hurry,
> we're tagging the music at the same time on two different computers. So it
> should be possible to have the nepomuk db on a remote location.
>
> Having another Nepomuk db would be a very tedious job. I think it would be
a lot simpler just for each person to have their own their Nepomuk db ( like
it is right now ), and additionally have metadata sharing. That way you can
easily query all the music that has been tagged by 'person'.

I generally prefer peer-to-peer networks instead of a situation where there
is a central database. In your case, what if the remote location isn't
available at that point? With a de-centralized system, you can easily share
or sync the metadata at a later point.


> As mentioned later in this thread, not all tags should be shared. It would
> be
> nice to have several nepomuk-dbs (private/shared). I understand that it's
> quite tricky to get the sharing right: It doesn't make sense to share tags
> for
> object which are not shared.
> You could say that tags of files which are readable by both accounts should
> also be saved in a shared nepomuk-db. Probably best would be an extended
> user
> interface where the user can choose the nepomuk location.
>
>
Having several databases would mean switching databases, and a lot of other
ugly stuff like - which database should the indexed data be stored? What
about the case where there is data common to both the databases? We would
need another virtuoso instance running ie more memory consumption.