On Thursday, December 19, 2013 02:27:43 AM Mark Gaiser wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Jos Poortvliet > > <jospoortvl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tuesday 17 December 2013 12:22:26 Todd wrote: > >> On Dec 12, 2013 6:36 PM, "Vishesh Handa" <m...@vhanda.in> wrote: > >> > > i’ll say it again here so that it is at least on record: i really > >> > >> disagree > >> > >> > > with renaming Nepomuk. call it Nepomuk 2 or whatever, but tossing > >> > > aside > >> > > name recognition and years of messaging is doing the promo teams a > >> > >> massive > >> > >> > > disservice. > >> > > > >> > > i hope that Baloo remains a technology name well hidden from both > >> > > users > >> > >> and > >> > >> > > developers. > >> > > >> > It will remain hidden. > >> > >> I am a bit confused by this. You say it will remain hidden, but the > >> emails > >> I am seeing are calling for the outright removal of Nepomuk api calls and > >> replacing them with baloo API calls. This does not seen very hidden from > >> developers. > >> > >> Further, you talk about disabling Nepomuk in system settings. This does > >> not seem very hidden from users. > >> > >> So, although I cannot speak for him, I am not sure Aaron's branding > >> concerns are being addressed. > > > > In that regard - the promo team is also a bit uncertain on this. We > > strongly advocated presenting Baloo as Nepomuk-next-gen, NOT a > > replacement or a rewrite-from-scratch. > > > > About the name - as Nepomuk also has its share of haters, I can't really > > judge if a rename has a net positive- or negative marketing value so I > > simply didn't and won't argue for or against it. Any real argument would > > need market research - which we can't really do very reliably. Unless > > somebody knows a web service which can judge the value of a word that > > internet users seem to attach to it or something like that :D > > > >> Now if this was keeping the Nepomuk namespace and billing baloo as a > >> replacement for virtuoso, then I could see this as being hidden, even > >> with > >> substantial changes in how the APIs actually work. But not when both > >> APIs > >> and user settings are being renamed. > >> > >> If any news site catches wind of this, I don't see how they could present > >> it as anything other than an outright abandonment of Nepomuk, and once > >> that > >> view gets spread around the web no amount of branding later will change > >> it. > > > > That we need to avoid. That is also why this mail was discussed with > > marketing before it was send (heck, Vishesh and myself discussed this at > > > > least a year ago already) and it is why it states: > >> This is not a completely new project as large parts of Baloo code are > >> derived from Nepomuk and therefore comes with years of testing and real > >> world use. > > > > Of course, this could be made more obvious and once we 'officially' say > > something, we should take care with this. And we will. > > > > That press can pick this up from here - is the price of doing things in > > the > > open... > > I don't see an issue for "the marketing" folks. > > Lets make a little comparison. > KHTML comes to mind. Some company (apple in this case) came by, forked > it and created the now quite awesome webkit. That in turn got forked > to Blink by google. It's just the evolution of software. And now we're > using webkit/blink in QML. Not KHTML. > > Nepomuk was great in spirit, but started off with issues users > experienced as annoying. So it was "forked" into a new project (Baloo) > and now works a lot saner and faster. It might be "abandoning" > nepomuk, but as far as i understand it, it's not abandoning the > nepomuk ideas. Just another evolution. > > Or this is how i see things in my simple mind :) > > But there is one thing the marketing people could do here. If "a > popular linux news site" picks this thread up the title will likely be > "KDE drops Nepomuk" or something alike. That should be prevented. > There should be a dot story outlining the evolution from Nepomuk to > Baloo and the benefit the user will notice. > > just my 5 cents.
It might help to get Sebastian Trueg to back it publically. Assuming he agrees with this direction, that is :). Failing that, stressing that this is being done by the very maintainers of nepomuk, evolving it, rather than forking it, might be best. While I am personally quite excited about finally getting this important part of the PIM stack to the point where we can deliver on the potential of our work over the past years, I do worry about the perception impact this will have. I'd also be tempted to provide continuity and position Baloo as part of or an extension to Nepomuk as subsystem. Till
