[Nepomuk] The Nepomuk Situation
Sebastian Trüg
trueg at kde.org
Wed May 16 18:46:26 UTC 2012
On 05/16/2012 08:37 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Sebastian Trüg <trueg at kde.org
> <mailto:trueg at kde.org>> wrote:
>
> On 05/16/2012 08:23 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote:
> > What about kdelibs/nepomuk/utils/* and the other ui stuff?
> >
> > Or since those are just APIs they can wait.
>
> I say let's postpone them, they are still in kdelibs.
>
>
> The facets are quite weird and I am not sure about releasing them again.
> The ui stuff - not sure.
>
>
> We have all the runtime stuff and nepomuk-core, that's all that matters
> right now.
>
> So, we just need to do -
>
> 1. use the Nepomuk2 namespace, and nepomuk2 include directory
> 2. Remove kde-runtime/nepomuk
>
> Regarding 1, I like Ivan's suggestion about BEGIN_NEPOMUK_NAMESPACE. If
> you want I can take care of it.
Ah, damn, I forgot about that. I am in the process of replacing
everything with "Nepomuk2". I want to put it all into easily revertable
commits.
The problem with Ivan's idea is that it does not cover the includes -
although I suppose we could handle that with a cmake definition...
>
> > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Sebastian Trüg <trueg at kde.org
> <mailto:trueg at kde.org>
> > <mailto:trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>>> wrote:
> >
> > I now prepared the required repositories:
> >
> > scratch/trueg/nepomuk-kde-kio
> > contains the 3 Nepomuk kio slaves
> >
> > scratch/trueg/nepomuk-kde-config
> > contains the KCM and the controller systray app
> >
> > The question is: where should we move them? Something like
> "KDE/Base"?
> > I suppose questions like these have already been discussed
> with respect
> > to KDE5?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Sebastian
> >
> > On 05/07/2012 03:58 PM, Sebastian Trüg wrote:
> > > On 05/07/2012 03:47 PM, ivan.cukic at gmail.com
> <mailto:ivan.cukic at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:ivan.cukic at gmail.com <mailto:ivan.cukic at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >> Maybe there could be something like qt has -
> > BEGIN_NEPOMUK_NAMESPACE... So that if the same needs to be done in
> > the future, we could just change the macro value.
> > >
> > > That would be much more work since each cpp file has the
> namespaces in
> > > the method definitions.
> > >
> > >> I don't know, thinking that Nepomuk2 namespace is looking
> rather
> > ugly :)
> > >
> > > it is indeed.
> > >
> > >> The dirtiest solution library-wise would be to have
> everything in
> > NepomukCore::Nepomuk::Something so that the only change in the
> > current code of nepomuk users would be a using namespace
> NepomukCore;
> > >>
> > >> Sorry for being a bit vague, I'm writing from my phone.
> > >>
> > >> Cheerio,
> > >> IvanOn 7.5.12. 14.49 Vishesh Handa wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Sebastian Trüg
> <trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>
> > <mailto:trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 05/07/2012 02:35 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Sebastian Trüg
> <trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>
> > <mailto:trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>>
> > >>
> > >>> <mailto:trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>
> <mailto:trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>>>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 05/07/2012 12:09 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > So, we're down to 3 options -
> > >>> >
> > >>> > *1.* nepomuk-core become a dependency of kdelibs.
> Kdelibs
> > is not
> > >>> touched.
> > >>> > *Problem:* Overlapping headers and possible mysterious
> > crashes if both
> > >>> > libraries are loaded.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > *2.* nepomuk-core installs headers under nepomuk2. It's
> > released
> > >>> > independently.
> > >>> > *Problem:* Mysterious crashes if both libraries are
> loaded.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > *3.* nepomuk-core installs headers under nepomuk2
> and the
> > namespace is
> > >>> > changed to nepomuk2.
> > >>> > *Problem:* A lot more work :(
> > >>>
> > >>> Well, I suppose we could make this work with some sed
> magic. :P
> > >>> I would vote for option 3 which could then be reverted (or
> > not) for
> > >>> kde5.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I would prefer option 2.
> > >>>
> > >>> The mysterious crashes would only happen if an
> application's plugin
> > >>> links to the incorrect libraries.
> > >>>
> > >>> Is that a possibility for us?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I already experienced that. Took me a while to find the reason.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Alright.
> > >>
> > >> I would like the Nepomuk2 namespace and include directories be
> > removed for the frameworks, but I guess it is not a big deal
> if that
> > doesn't happen.
> > >>
> > >> ----
> > >>
> > >> Okay, everyone. This is the point where you chime in and say -
> > "We're okay with this" or you raise your objections. We would like
> > to get this mess sorted in time for the 4.9 release.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Nepomuk mailing list
> > > Nepomuk at kde.org <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org>
> <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org>>
> > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nepomuk mailing list
> > Nepomuk at kde.org <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org>
> <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org <mailto:Nepomuk at kde.org>>
> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Vishesh Handa
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Vishesh Handa
>
More information about the Nepomuk
mailing list