[Nepomuk] Nepomuk2 namespace (was Nepomuk - Moving out of kde-runtime)

[Sebastian Trüg]

I liked the idea of the marco actually. This was just simpler to do with
sed and friends. The idea was to put it all into one commit which could
easily be reverted. Sadly that is not the case anymore since some
changes have been done on master directly now. :(

As for the ns in cpp files: the only reason is esthetics. I simply think
the code looks nicer this way. :P

Cheers,
Sebastian

On 05/23/2012 09:43 AM, Ivan Cukic wrote:
> This goes only to nepomuk ml.
> 
> Just one quesiton, why are all nepomuk's .cpp files done in a manner to 
> specify the namespace for each implemented methos instead of just putting the 
> contents in a namespace Nepomuk { ... } block.
> 
> So, why this:
> 
> Nepomuk::Class::someMethod1(...) { ... }
> Nepomuk::Class::someMethod2(...) { ... }
> Nepomuk::Class::someMethod3(...) { ... }
> Nepomuk::Class::someMethod4(...) { ... }
> 
> Instead of this:
> 
> namespace Nepomuk {
> Class::someMethod1(...) { ... }
> Class::someMethod2(...) { ... }
> Class::someMethod3(...) { ... }
> Class::someMethod4(...) { ... }
> }
> 
> I'm asking this because if, for KF5, we are (hopefully) to choose some other 
> namespace name (for example Nepomuk again), it would need less changes to the 
> code, since Sebastian didn't like the idea of having a macro for the nepomuk 
> namespace like Qt does.
> 
> Cheerio,
> Ivan
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, 23. May 2012. 5.04.37 Vishesh Handa wrote:
>> Sebastian
>>
>> Change of plans. As per recent discussions with tsdgeos and kde_pepo on
>> #kde-devel -
>>
>> They would like to avoid too many new repositories. So, if it's okay with
>> you we'll keep the nepomuk-kde-config and nepomuk-kde-kio code in
>> kde-runtime, while the rest can be removed as it is there in nepomuk-core.
>>
>> If you have the time to port some of the stuff to Nepomuk2 it would be
>> nice, otherwise I'll take care of all of it tomorrow.
>>
>> Good Night
>>
>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Vishesh Handa <me at vhanda.in> wrote:
>>> Does anyone have suggestions on where nepomuk-kde-kio and
>>> nepomuk-kde-config should be placed?
>>>
>>> I was thinking under kde-baseaps, but that might not be correct. Any
>>> suggestions?
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Kevin Krammer <krammer at kde.org> wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, 2012-05-17, Sebastian Trüg wrote:
>>>>> I think we can manage BC. The only thing that would be hard are the
>>>>> DBus
>>>>> interfaces. But since nepomuk-core contains client libs which are
>>>>> supposed to be used instead of the dbus interfaces...
>>>>
>>>> I think as long as you didn't advertise the D-Bus interfaces as a kind of
>>>> public API, e.g. by installing D-Bus introspection XML files, that should
>>>> be
>>>> fine.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Kevin
>>>>
>>>>> On 05/17/2012 09:19 PM, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>>>>>> On 2012-05-17, Vishesh Handa <me at vhanda.in> wrote:
>>>>>>> @Packagers: We will not be maintaining binary compatibility in
>>>>>>> nepomuk-core. At least not for KDE 4.10. We still need to break a
>>>>
>>>> lot of
>>>>
>>>>>>> things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NACK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this is a completely no go.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Sune
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to
>>>>>>> unsubscribe <<
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer
>>>> KDE user support, developer mentoring
>>>>
>>>>>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to
>>>>
>>>> unsubscribe <<
>>>
>>> --
>>> Vishesh Handa