[Nepomuk] Re: Review Request: Sub-resource handling in DMS removeProperty

[Vishesh Handa]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101994/#review4954
-----------------------------------------------------------



nepomuk/services/storage/test/datamanagementmodeltest.cpp
<http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101994/#comment4342>

    You test seems to imply that the sub-resource will not be removed, if some other resource has it as its sub resource.
    
    It should be that the sub-resource won't be deleted if any other resource has any property accessing it.
    
    Example - The Strigi indexer adds "Mickey Mouse" as a contact because he is the author of some PDF file. Then someone creates a pimo:Person of "Mickey Mouse" and adds pimo:groundingOccurance to that contact.
    
    If that PDF file is deleted, then should we delete the contact? 


- Vishesh


On July 18, 2011, 3:04 p.m., Sebastian Trueg wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101994/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 18, 2011, 3:04 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Nepomuk.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> So far we have sub-resource handling in removeResources and removeDataByApplication. It means that sub-resources are removed if their super-resources are removed, too and no other resource references them. However, this is not done in removeProperty and removeProperties. IMHO it should be done, too. As soon as the nao:hasSubResource relation is removed there is no relation between super- and sub-resource anymore rendering the sub-resource pointless.
> 
> The attached patch simply adds two unit tests. It does not include the actual code which implements the sub-resource handling in removeProperty and removeProperties. The point of this review request is to determine if the behavior explained above is what we want or not.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   nepomuk/services/storage/test/datamanagementmodeltest.h a46e525 
>   nepomuk/services/storage/test/datamanagementmodeltest.cpp f2ca76e 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101994/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sebastian
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/nepomuk/attachments/20110722/ea5237e6/attachment-0001.htm