On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Simeon Bird <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey Vishesh, > > I took a look at this this evening - it all looks fine and works as > expected for me. > And it is plainly a good idea :). > The code looks good to me too, so consider this my "ship it!". > > Only things that broke are: > 1) the kcm and nepomukcontroller didn't recognise the file indexing > service anymore > fixed. > 2) nepomukctl needs updating. > fixed > > but these should be easy enough to fix. > > Simeon > > > On 10 March 2013 14:08, Vishesh Handa <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey Simeon > >> > >> I've been meaning to implement a Nepomuk::Service2 class which would > serve > >> as an upgrade from the normal Service class. Given the problems we were > >> having with properly shutting down the storage service, I decided to > >> implement it. It's currently in the feature/service2 branch in > nepomuk-core. > >> > >> The main difference is that now each service installs its own process, > >> instead of installing a library which is then loaded by the > >> nepomukservicestub. This results in somewhat lighter processes, and it > makes > >> debugging a lot easier as we will no longer get reports that say > >> "nepomukservicestub" is acting up. > >> > >> Additionally, it simplifies the entire parent child relationship for > each > >> service. Now each service is the top most parent QObject, and it is > deleted > >> after the QApplication::exec finishes. No more wacky static variables. > >> > >> Problems - > >> 1. I've kinda broken the /servicecontrol name and description functions. > >> Implementing this would require parsing the desktop files, which I still > >> haven't done. > Still trying to fix this. I'll merge after fixing this and some more testing. > >> 2. The nepomukservicestub used to catch interrupts and exit gracefully - > >> This isn't the case any more. I'm not sure why. > fixed this by installing a custom signal handler > >> > >> Do you think you could have a look at the code when you get some time? > >> Please :) > >> > >> I was also thinking of renaming the nepomukserver to nepomuk_control, > since > >> it isn't really a server, but I'm afraid that might clash with the > >> nepomukcontroller. > Any comments on renaming nepomukserver? > >> > >> -- > >> Vishesh Handa > -- Vishesh Handa
_______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
