+1 for that as an approach
> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 10:21:47 +0000
> Subject: Re: Fuseki2 UI development
> From: rve...@dotnetrdf.org
> To: dev@jena.apache.org
>
> I would be happy having Fuseki 2 included in 2.13.0 as an Alpha/Beta
> release
>
> I am tended to go with the "release early, release often" approach. We
> know Fuseki 2 is going to be a big change for people and that it isn't all
> going to work yet but that shouldn't stop us putting it in the hands of
> people and getting real world feedback
>
> Rob
>
> On 03/03/2015 21:07, "Ian Dickinson" <i.j.dickin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi folks,
> >Firstly an apology for dropping off the radar for a while. I've been
> >very busy with work, so haven't been attending to dev@ emails for a
> >while.
> >
> >Anyway, I'm picking up the reins again on the Fuseki2 UI work. I
> >notice that there are a number of bug reports outstanding, thanks for
> >those whoever contributed to them. There are also some unfinished
> >threads on the originally planned Fuseki2 UI capabilities (some of
> >which will need back-end support via the server protocol). Finally
> >there have been some changes that have been introduced by some of the
> >patches that have gone through while my attention has been elsewhere,
> >some of which have negatively impacted existing capabilities.
> >
> >Tl;dr - there's quite a bit of work to do to bring the Fuseki2 UI up
> >to where I'd like it to be, including closing out the new bugreps.
> >
> >One of the reasons for bringing this to the list is with respect to
> >the forthcoming release. I can't get the outstanding work done in a
> >timeframe that will do anything other than delay this release. Given
> >my other work commitments, it's going to be O(weeks) before the work
> >queue that I can see on Fuseki2 is under control. We have a choice
> >about what to do about that. One option would be to include the
> >current UI as-is, but label it more clearly as an alpha release.
> >Another would be to decouple the new UI from this release, but aim for
> >another release in O(months) when Fuseki2 is up to a good standard.
> >There may be other options between those extremes.
> >
> >Opinions?
> >
> >Ian
>
>
>
>
