Fixed a, b and c (a was auto-correct in TextEdit being "helpful")

d is kinda tricky because having full transaction support requires either
a multi-threaded app or a trivialized example.  Plus I'm not 100% sure the
driver does transactions perfectly, there is some test coverage for it but
I'm not sure how well covered the functionality is.

Rob


On 8/23/13 3:16 PM, "Stephen Allen" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hi Rob,
>
>Looks pretty good.  A few comments:
>
>  a) Typo in second code block in section "Basic Usage | Making a
>Connection":  s/"jdbc:jena:men:empty=true"/"jdbc:jena:mem:empty=true".
>  Same error on drivers.html in the second code block of the
>"Available Drivers | In-Memory" section.
>
>  b) Would suggest changing the section titles under Basic Usage to
>instead read: "Establishing a Connection", "Performing Queries", and
>"Performing Updates".
>
>  c) Suggest adding try/finally blocks for both the Query and Update
>examples.
>
>  d) Suggest adding an example of transactions for TDB connections
>(one that contains both read/update queries would be cool).
>
>
>-Stephen
>
>
>On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Rob Vesse <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I've put together some basic documentation which is in staging at
>> http://jena.staging.apache.org/documentation/jdbc/index.html if anyone
>> wants to review
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>> On 8/23/13 11:26 AM, "Rob Vesse" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On the JDBC front I think it is essentially ready to go in this release,
>>>my main concern is integrating it into the build.
>>>
>>>Right now it is not called out as a module of the top level POM so does
>>>not automatically get built by mvn unless you go and build in the
>>>jena-jdbc directory yourself.
>>>
>>>However it is a slow build at ~5 mins or a modern machine like my 2011
>>>MacBook Pro, and much longer on older/heavily contended machines like
>>>Apache build servers.  Therefore my concern is whether developers are
>>>willing to stomach a longer build on their local machines?
>>>
>>>One thought I had was about using maven profiles, right now I have the
>>>following in my local uncommitted top level POM:
>>>
>>><profiles>
>>><profile>
>>><!--
>>>This is the dev profile, it only builds the common modules and
>>>does not build the slow building JDBC modules or the distribution
>>>packages
>>>-->
>>><id>dev</id>
>>><activation>
>>><activeByDefault>true</activeByDefault>
>>></activation>
>>><modules>
>>><module>jena-parent</module>
>>><module>jena-iri</module>
>>><module>jena-core</module>
>>><module>jena-arq</module>
>>><module>jena-tdb</module>
>>><module>jena-text</module>
>>><module>jena-sdb</module>
>>><module>jena-fuseki</module>
>>><!-- Slow to build - exclude from default dev build -->
>>><!-- <module>jena-jdbc</module>-->
>>><module>apache-jena-libs</module>
>>><!-- Don't build distro package every time -->
>>><!-- <module>apache-jena</module> -->
>>></modules>
>>></profile>
>>><profile>
>>><!--
>>>This is the complete profile, it builds everything including slow
>>>building modules and
>>>the distribution packages.
>>>This profile should be enabled when cutting a release
>>>-P apache-release,complete
>>>-->
>>><id>complete</id>
>>><modules>
>>><module>jena-parent</module>
>>><module>jena-iri</module>
>>><module>jena-core</module>
>>><module>jena-arq</module>
>>><module>jena-tdb</module>
>>><module>jena-text</module>
>>><module>jena-sdb</module>
>>><module>jena-fuseki</module>
>>><module>jena-jdbc</module>
>>><module>apache-jena-libs</module>
>>><module>apache-jena</module>
>>></modules>
>>></profile>
>>></profiles>
>>>
>>>Would people be OK with going with something like this?  It would mean
>>>that by default we only build the common modules and then when we come
>>>to
>>>do releases or want a more thorough build we can build the complete
>>>thing
>>>(or even add a third release specific profile?).  We may want to have a
>>>little more discussion about which modules go in which profile and how
>>>many profiles we want to have.  I can commit what I have now and people
>>>can iterate on it?
>>>
>>>Getting back to JDBC specifics, no there is not any website
>>>documentation
>>>yet.  However the javadoc is pretty comprehensive so with a couple of
>>>basic web pages written up may be sufficient, I will try and at least
>>>stub those pages out today.
>>>
>>>Rob
>>

Reply via email to