Hi, I would not use org.apache.commons.rdf until it refers to the actual code of the commons-rdf project. I think a switch to that would imply a major release in any case, wouldn't it?
my two cents, Enrico -- Enrico Daga http://about.me/enridaga On 27 March 2015 at 10:51, Reto Gmür <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> e.g. this would flag up the return type of size() method of Graph >> > > Well spotted, the size method in the incubator project is incompatible with > Collection<Triple>. We should see if this can be changed, maybe in > > - size: int: according to Collection.size > - exactSize: long: the exact size > - approximateSize: long: the approximate size, which for some > implementations might be significantly less expensive to compute > > Cheers, > > Reto > > > >> >> >> >> On 25 March 2015 at 16:14, Reto Gmür <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Rehi, >> > >> > With the release of parent 6 we are in principle ready to relase the >> > clerezza-rdf-core projects. I've made good progress porting a lot of >> > modules to the new rdf-core, some remaining issues there (i.e. outside >> > rdf-core) are mainly related to the changes in scala version and the scr >> > plugin. >> > >> > So there are two issues left: >> > - Using the package org.apache.commons.rdf is an advantage to be as close >> > as possible to the future rdf commons, but an obvious disadvantage if >> this >> > is not going to become or converge into commons rdf, and clerezza-commons >> > remains an alternative or an extension to apache commons rdf. >> > - The casing is still an issue, should we keep it at is now, change it to >> > use the same casing as the github/incubator proposal? Change all of >> > clerezza to a casing convention that results? >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Reto >> > >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Reto Gmür <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> I hope some of you could have a look at the recent commits in the >> >> rdf-common branch. The umbrella issue CLEREZZA-960 shows the progress in >> >> porting clerezza components to clerezza RDF commons. >> >> >> >> The release order should ideally be as follows: >> >> - Clerezza parent: Updating java version, removing scr plugin, and >> others >> >> - rdf-commons-api and rdf-commons-imp-uils >> >> - rdf.core >> >> - rdf.jena.commons, rdf.jena.facade, rdf.jena.parser >> >> - rdf.schemagen, maven-ontologies-plugin, rdf.ontologies >> >> - rdf.testutils, rdf.utils >> >> >> >> We could start releasing the parent or we make a vote on all of them >> >> together. It should happen fast as the current situation is not >> >> satisfactory, one has to first compile the parent from our main >> repository >> >> before the clerrezza-rdf-core repository can be compiled. >> >> >> >> Basically the code is there, following issues are still open: >> >> - make rdf-commons--* OSGi bundles (easy) >> >> - naming of artifacts (currently >> >> org.apache.clerezza.commons-rdf:commons-rdf-api) >> >> - package name, currently org.apache.commons.rdf to be as close as >> >> possible to the expected rdf commons >> >> - casing: the github code the incubating commons wants to adopt uses all >> >> uppercase acronyms (e.g. IRI, RDFTerm), on the mailing list[1] the idea >> of >> >> casng acronyms like normal words (as clerezza does) found some support, >> but >> >> other wants to keep the all uppercase for now). So the question is if we >> >> should use (as in the current code) the clerezza way of casing (Iri, >> >> RdfTerm) or switch to uppercase acronyms. >> >> >> >> Please have a look at the above issue and ideally the code and let me >> know >> >> if and how you think things should be changed. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Reto >> >> >> >> 1. >> >> >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-commonsrdf-dev/201503.mbox/%3CCALvhUEUg5_xvkYJPUPBhtmbbYT2ns1XoHXrNZhd64od6h48jvA%40mail.gmail.com%3E >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Stian Soiland-Reyes >> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) >> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 >>
