Is it your impression that the "special OSGi spice" additions are something 
that Jena could reasonably adopt into normal builds? Then maybe they wouldn't 
feel the need to do this… 

---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library

On Sep 9, 2015, at 4:06 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> On 09/09/15 11:49, Rob Vesse wrote:
>> This seems a little odd to me.  It looks like they are placing these
>> artifacts in their own group ID.  However it still sets a slightly strange
>> precedence if Apache Foo can release artifacts named Apache Bar even if
>> they do so under their own maven coordinates
> 
> We do something vaguely similar with Google Guava using "jena-shaded-guava". 
> The original Guava binaries do not include NOTICE and LICENSE files.  But 
> then we change the class file and sources in accordance with the package 
> names.  Maybe Clerezza should shade to under org.apache.clerezza.ext.jena.
> 
> Clerezza artifact labelling does confuse.
> 
> The modifications to Jena binaries are that there is other stuff in the jars 
> for OSGi, timestamps are "now" not "then".  You can't tell by looking at jars 
> whether there code changes, but the related pom looks like a shade-OSGi step.
> 
> This is not specific to Jena - there are other jars having had the same 
> process applied to them.
> 
> The removing the NOTICE and LICENSE is a problem.
> 
> They are specific to the modules and ought to carried over - they can have 
> more added but removing the contents of another open source projects N&L is a 
> big no-no.
> 
>       Andy
> 
>> Is this something they've been doing for a long time or is this a new
>> thing?
>> 
>> If new why couldn't they work with us to provide the fixes back to Jena?
>> 
>> Rob
>> 
>> On 07/09/2015 17:35, "Andy Seaborne" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> PMC,
>>> 
>>> Clerezza is proposing redistributing modified Jena 2.13.0 binaries.
>>> NOTICE and LICENSE have been changed.  These would go into the Apache
>>> release maven repo.
>>> 
>>> The binaries are currently at:
>>> 
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheclerezza-1009/
>>> org/apache/clerezza/ext/org.apache.jena.jena-core/2.13.0_1/
>>> 
>>> (Modified version number as well - it does not make clear that 2.13.0_1
>>> is not Jena-project release.)
>>> 
>>>     Andy
>>> 
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: [] 201508 Release of 23 Clerezza modules
>>> Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 12:12:23 +0100
>>> From: Andy Seaborne <[email protected]>
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> 
>>> On 06/09/15 18:39, Reto Gmür wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 05/09/15 16:36, Reto Gmür wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This is a partial clerezza release of 23 modules bringing the
>>>>>> following
>>>>>> improvements:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - Fixed issues preventing rdf.rdfjson and rdf.jena.sparql to expose
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> OSGi-DS services
>>>>>> - Updated to latest version of Jersey
>>>>>> - Updated Jena Version
>>>>>> - Contains integration tests
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It contains the following artifacts that shall be released to maven
>>>>>> central:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Where are the convenience binaries?  (I didn't see anything on
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/#stagingRepositories but may have missed
>>>>> something)
>>>> 
>>>> Enabled now. Here:
>>>> 
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheclerezza-1009
>>>> /
>>> 
>>> Could you have used Jena's OSGi artifact?
>>> 
>>> The binaries have had the NOTICE and LICENSE files replaced in both jar
>>> and sources.jar. These miss the necessary declarations.
>>> 
>>>     Andy
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Reto
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to