On 05/07/2012 03:47 PM, ivan.cu...@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 <tr...@kde.org> wrote: > > On 05/07/2012 02:35 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Sebastian Trüg <tr...@kde.org > >> <mailto:tr...@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. > > > >
