Re: New module proposal: tracker

On 18/08/09 18:50, Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 18:05 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
On 18/08/09 17:48, Dan Winship wrote:
On 08/18/2009 12:32 PM, Martyn Russell wrote:
The only reason you're suggesting tracker-store shouldn't be called
"tracker" is due to the social stigma associated with what Tracker is,
i.e. all about the file system.

The stigma associated with Tracker is because historically the tracker
hackers have been unable to describe what the non-filesystem-indexing
part of Tracker does without either (a) sounding like a dead German

Well, I am English ;) so no chance of that.

or (b) claiming it solves all possible problems involving

I don't think I have heard any Tracker developers state it solves all
problems involving data. Who, when, where was this?


I have no idea what a semantic search is,

or what an ontology is supposed to be either.

If the tracker-store (which seems to be what's being proposed) is great
for storing web browser history, and making it available, why not start

We have started there, just not in GNOME specifically :) the Maemo platform does have integration with tracker-store, but I don't think I can go into detail. So technically, there are applications using tracker-store, just none in GNOME except Evolution and Evolution really just pushes data to us via a plugin and we do the SPARQL bit internally.

Having the tracker-store in GNOME just for the sake of having it there
(or hoping that developers will start using it because it's blessed) is
the wrong way around. Write patches for apps to use it, otherwise it's
as good as dead-weight.

Once we have our bit in a good state, we can work on more apps sure. Right now, Evolution and the file system miner are the two internal data providers for the store.

I know I forgot about the Evolution work, for that I apologise.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]