On 03/08/2011 08:58 PM, todd rme wrote: > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:57 AM, Sebastian Trüg <tr...@kde.org> wrote: >> >> >> On 03/08/2011 09:53 AM, Ivan Cukic wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> First of all, one thing to mention - KDE apps are not advised to use >>> QtZeitgeist directly because that way the 'tracking' has no idea about the >>> activities. >>> >>> File/resource tracking (and thus rating) should be per activity - as an >>> example, there is no point in showing java docs that you used in >>> 'Developing J2EE application' activity in a 'KDE development activity'. >>> >>> The classes that should be used are KActivity* which will soon enter >>> kdelibs/experimental. >>> >>> The activity manager (the dbus service behind KActivity classes) will have >>> both Zeitgeist and Nepomuk as backends. (both as optional deps) >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Zeitgeist vs Nepomuk >>> >>> Sebastian concluded that storing all the events in Nepomuk wouldn't be >>> wise, so it was agreed to store them in Zeitgeist which was designed with >>> that sole purpose. >> >> to be precise: I wanted to test storing all in Nepomuk first which I >> have not done yet. > > Does this mean you would want to give nepomuk this capability if the > tests are successful?
it is only about storing the data. There is no point in recreating all the zeitgeist plugins. But storing the data in Nepomuk makes a lot of sense since then it can be queried in combination with any other data as compared to only being able to list usage times. Cheers, Sebastian