You are right. If we create a new infrastructure (we cannot reuse the nepomuk ticket system anyway since it is not open) I would say that we migrate the existing tickets. The next step would then be to merge in the extensions by Evgeny and Philip. All in all I just think we need a system that gives us all the power we need. xesam.org and the nepomuk server both do NOT provide it.
Cheers, Sebastian On Monday 04 May 2009 22:56:14 Leo Sauermann wrote: > Hi Guys, > > I think the nepomuk/OSCAF sourceforge project that Sebastian Trüg and I > have created > for OSCAF a few months ago may help here. > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/oscaf > > we have a code repository where everyone can write who is willing to > work on it, > and a ticket system, > and the authority to officially continue the nepomuk ontologies there, > backed by the OSCAF foundation. > > the nepomuk ontologies will move there anytime we find enough volunteers to > work on it, or commercial developers to join OSCAF to work on it. > > we already have a TRAC for tickets there and I can move the NEPOMUK > ontologies > over. > > Still, that doesn't solve the problem of "who is going to do a good job > here", > as the problem is not "we have to create a new project", > we already had that on sourceforge since 20th February 2009, > the problem is: > > <old wiseguy> > who is going to work on the 23 tickets that we already know of, which > were reported > by Evgeny and I don't have the time to fix them? > > http://dev.nepomuk.semanticdesktop.org/wiki/OntologyMaintenance > > in my experience, creating a new project does only swallow worktime and > discussion time, > creates fud in all the stakeholders involved, and may drag apart the > community. > but does not solve these tickets. > I would guess that hte first thing a new admin of a new project would do > is say > "this has to be simpler than before, all the tickets are garbage anyway > we need to get rid > off, so lets start with a blank slate, horray". > > Well, the tickets are there because, after some years of work, these are > the hardest > ontology nuts to crack.... and some of them are also from NOKIA guys who > use the ontology for maemo. > </old wiseguy> > > so, old wiseguy agrees that we must join forces and come to one ontology, > but this does not magically solve the 23 hard-nut problems that are > unsolved since months. > > best > Leo > > > It was Arun Raghavan who said at the right time 04.05.2009 21:30 the > > following words: > > 2009/5/4 Sebastian Trüg <[email protected]>: > >> Hi guys, > >> > >> maybe you read my blog about Xesam and Nepomuk[1]. In essence I think we > >> should create a new project which will handle the maintenance of the > >> desktop ontologies. So far for me this means the Nepomuk ontologies NAO, > >> NIE, and PIMO. > >> IMHO it makes perfect sense to have a dedicated project for several > >> reasons: * no copies floating around in different project packages > >> * one standard that we agree on (I know this is hard) > >> * one platform for discussion/bugs and general maintenance > >> * One central ontologies package very much like the mimetype package > > > > This sounds perfect. > > > >> I mentioned in my blog that we already created the OSCAF sourceforge > >> project[2]. Now I don't really care how we name the project. Maybe OSCAF > >> is not the best name, maybe something very simple like > >> "desktop-ontologies" would > > > > I would say that we should reuse one of Xesam or Nepomuk for this. Why > > add one more buzz-word to an already crowded namespace? :) Besides, it > > makes it easier to associate the ontology with the project, then. > > > >> be better. In any case I think using sourceforce (I prefer it since I > >> already have 3 projects there and was always happy with it) or something > >> similar is a good idea. We then don't need to spend time on setting up > >> task tracking systems or mailing lists. We just use what is there. > > > > _If_ we agree to keep this effort under the head of Nepomuk or Xesam, > > I guess we can just reuse the existing infrastructure? > > > > Thanks for taking the initiative on this -- I think it'd be great if > > we could all quickly converge on how we want to proceed from here, and > > get the ball rolling. > > > > Cheers, _______________________________________________ Xesam mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xesam
