fatgerman at ntlworld.com
Mon Mar 9 23:49:51 UTC 2009
On Monday 09 March 2009 19:16:35 Derek Broughton wrote:
> Nigel Ridley wrote:
> > I think it's a bit like Mark Greenwood said - that they're still
> > experimental. Which does lead to the question as to why they are enabled
> > by default.
> Akonadi is definitely _not_ experimental. kdepim development using akonadi
> was going on when I still hung out on the kdepim-devel list, which is years
> ago. The aim in all those years was to have akonadi as the only storage
> backend for kdepim in KDE4. So you don't get a choice any more. Akonadi
> is the storage backend if you want to use kontact.
OK that's great, and all very well, and ... yeah... but why do I care? Why does it advertise its presence all over my system as if it's some kind of application? If it's a backend it should behave like one and remain hidden. Exposing one's backend to all and sundry is just impolite.
Perhaps, you know, if they'd called it 'KDE PIM Storage Backend' instead of giving it a meaningless and confusing name this entire discussion probably would never have happened. Where did this name come from? It would be less confusing if we knew. Is it an acronym perhaps? AKONADI - Another Konfusingly Obfuscated Name Anonymising Dearth of Inspiration? Albert's Kleptomania Only Now Announces Despicable Intentions?
Nepomuk? NEPOMUK? Never Enable Peculiar Old Mechanism Unless Kurious? Nearly Everyone Ponders Obscure Meaningless Unintelligible Klaptrap?
But of course, sensible names are boring.. it's only one step from that to working at Microsoft.. and nobody wants that to happen.. ;)
Thanks for Klarifying.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the kubuntu-users