[Xesam] Xesam 1.0 vs Xesam 2.0

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen]

2008/10/7 Urho Konttori <urho.konttori at nokia.com>:
> Hi Mikkel, thanks for the long mail.

He, yeah. Am glad you managed to read through it :-)

<long snip>
>> Compatibility and lock-in. Some of you have aired concerns that the
>> world will settle on Xesam 1.0 even if we release it with the promise
>> of a soon-to-come, incompatible,  2.0. I don't believe that to be
>> true. There are several reasons for this. The primary being that Xesam
>> 2.0 will simply be *so* much better that people will really want to go
>> there. Second being that libraries like xesam-glib or xesam-qt can in
>> fact utilize 2.0 underneath staying API compatible if they plan their
>> architecture carefully (at least xesam-glib will be able to do this).
>> This of course requires that Xesam 2.0 is shaping up in a predictable
>> way before the client libraries finalize their APIs.
>>
>
> I'd like to minimize the confusion. Switching to the Nepomuk ontology for
> the PIM side in 2.0 is so big change that it would be good to leave that
> side completely out of 1.0.

Yes, it makes sense to keep the breakage between 1.0 and 2.0 as
minimal as possible.

It is my belief that the no one currently use the PIM side of the
Xesam ontology and if that holds true (I'll dig a bit around the web)
then I am also for this solution.

Evgeny? I think this is in fact also along the lines of what you have
been speculating in the past?


-- 
Cheers,
Mikkel