[PATCH] Making Soprano optional (again) in kdelibs

Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto jmbsvicetto at gentoo.org
Wed Dec 30 00:43:31 CET 2009

Hash: SHA1

On 29-12-2009 18:30, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> Hey,
> On Tuesday 29 December 2009 19:13:08 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
>>   On Tuesday 29 of December 2009 13:50:12 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
>>> On Sunday 27 December 2009 14:34:23 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
>>>> While keeping if (NEPOMUK_FOUND) and alike CMake code is considerable
>>>> maintenance cost - this cost has already been born so there's nothing
>>>> else
>>>>  to  do for 4.4 (and dropping this code to simplify CMake files relying
>>>>  on the fact that Nepomuk libs being mandatory would cause another
>>>>  maintenance cost).
>>> Wrong, keeping ifdef's brings long-term testing and maintainance costs,
>>> as you basically get two branches in one code base, which means that
>>> testing for each of those branches is cut down, and some new code has to
>>> be written for two scenarios. That's why we try to reduce these cases to
>>> an absolute minimum.
>> That's of course true and I agree (still making such change for 4.4 is
>>  risky  as it's easy to break something in the process and time is running
>>  out).
>> One little problem remains - in case no one noticed - KDE SC is now (as of 
>> 4.4) officially the first Desktop Environment in the history 
>> that requires two *full*-*blown* relational database servers 
>> *running*.
> I get your point (bloat), but being vague and sarcastic is not the way to go about 
> it. The best is to provide numbers to back it up and show the real costs of running 
> two databases. I believe they're rather easy to attain, given the right tools, so I 
> don't really get why you're coming with a long rant how relational database systems 
> bloat KDE (my interpretation), instead of just listing those numbers.

If "common sense" won't cut it, do I need to start a vote, forum thread
or something else asking KDE users (I can do it for Gentoo alone) if
they are worried/upset about this? Should I ask how many "former KDE
users" stopped using it because of the MySQL dep?
If you want, I can point you all to the user rants in Gentoo bugs about
MySQL dependency for KDE as a whole and amarok as one particular KDE app.
Why is it so hard to understand that KDE is getting more and more bloat?
By the way, no other distributions / packagers have issues with the KDE

>> I think all above justifies my actions towards making Nepomuk (and thus 
>> virtuoso) not mandatory wherever possible.
> Not really, numbers would.

> The real issue hasn't been fixed. That's what Allen's email is about. What I wanted 
> to know about is a *specific* problem (i.e. "this won't work because ..."). Your 
> email is rather hand-wavy. 
> Note that I, too, would like to keep KDE's footprint small, but going "OMG two 
> databases!!!!!!!!111111" shortly before RC1 is unproductive.

As Maciej hinted, you're opening the door for another group of KDE devs
later call for precedent to add hard deps on sqlite, postgres or
whatever is their favourite DB. Requiring full blown relational
databases for a DE is probably a good sign that someone is going in the
wrong direction. Again, I can point you to comments by users in Gentoo
bugs complaining about this - it's not just "my individual opinion".

- -- 

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


More information about the release-team mailing list