On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 13:05 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote: > Hi all, > > So we recently polled the tracker mailing list to make sure the core > developers and others interested had an opinion on GNOME module > inclusion for Tracker. You can see the thread here: > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/tracker-list/2009-August/msg00007.html > > The response was positive. So I would like to propose Tracker as a new > GNOME module. > > Right now Tracker 0.7 is currently in development and we are hoping to > get the 0.7. unstable release out the door in the coming month or so. > > Right now we are considering making the miners (the file system crawling > at this point) optional so it acts purely as a store if needed by ISVs. > This is not yet done in master but can be if that's a GNOME requirement. > > Dependencies include: > > libxml >= 0.6 > libpng >= 1.2 > libuuid > zlib > dbus >= 0.60 > sqlite3 >= 3.5 (built with --enable-load-extension) > hal >= 0.5 > vala >= 0.7.3 > pango >= 1.0.0 > > Beyond that, the rest of the requirements affect your extraction > ability. For example, if poppler-glib is on the platform, you can then > extract PDF files. This also depends on if streamanalyser is used or not > (which does all extraction for us and negates the needs for specific > libraries in Tracker). > > Dependencies about to be dropped but still needed: > > gmime > lex > yacc > libraptor > > The git repository is here: > > http://git.gnome.org/cgit/tracker/ > > We import the following libraries: > > libinotify > rasqal > > Licensing wise, those libinotify and rasqal both share the LGPL, as does > libtracker. The rest is GPLv2 or later. > > /discuss ;) > Well. Currently there are two projects which, at least for the first sight, are similar - Tracker and Beagle. So the first question is why should Gnome include Tracker and not Beagle? I cannot say that mine experience is shared but 0.6.9x Tracker was unusable (#584822) - contrary to Beagle. Regards
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part