On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan <pocallaghan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 08:55 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: >> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: >> >> > My reading was that he worried about *non-KDE* apps doing similar things >> > without any interaction with Akonadi. >> > >> > So there are now two independant databases, one in KDE and one in Gnome. >> > Those of us who use a mixture of apps are running both of them. >> >> If it matters, akonadi was designed to be DE-independent, with no kde >> dependencies (other than qt). > > Is this because it uses qt to talk to the other KDE apps? Just curious. > > More to the point, my comment isn't about the relative merits of the > various technologies. It's more in the sense that choice can carry costs > which we may not always be aware of. What cost are you considering there? The extra secondary storage bits used by an additional database? I do not believe that simply having a multiple databases increases MySQLs load. -- Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
