We should have Dietmars fix of MARMOTTA-672 (PR #33) in. Apart from that, we're good to go.
The switch to RDF4J I'd prefer to have in a post-3.4 version. Since it includes package/class renames, it should be a 4.0! Best, Jakob On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 at 02:27 Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> wrote: > Cool, Jakob! > > Now that MARMOTTA-668 we can work on releasing 3.4.0, finally ;-) > > This weekend it's gonna be difficult for me. But if nobody took care > before, I could commit some time the upcoming week. > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Xavier Sumba <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I was working in MARMOTTA-668, but Jakob fixes it first :(. I can work > > around those big tests this weekend and go little by little to have > > Marmotta with RDF4J. Since the maven plugin is fixed, I think we can make > > the new release, right? Or is there something that still needs some work? > > > > > > On Feb 16, 2018, at 03:01, Jakob Frank <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 at 04:27 FRANCISCO XAVIER SUMBA TORAL < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > I am going to point out the pending issues for porting Marmotta to RDF4J > > [1] > > > > Create issues for managing special data types such as NaN, -INF, and INF, > > and find an alternative for LDP Test suite. Have this issues to be > created > > after merging into the branch develop or before? > > > > I'd say you can create those issues right away when you identify them. > > Just make sure to somehow link them to the original issue MARMOTTA-659. > > > > What's going to happen with experimental backends that use TinkerPop 2.x? > > > > > > see below (GraphSail)... > > > > > > Name conventions, change Sesame for RDF4J in modules, class names, and > > dependencies. > > > > For me a simple s/Sesame/RDF4J/ should be fine. > > > > > > Should we ignore two new tests in RDF4J for large transactions; they are > > passing but take too long. > > > > Would it be possible to move those tests to a separate group that is > > skipped by default but can be easily activated for a build? I think of > > something like JUnit Categories [3] > > > > For the 2nd item, there is an implementation of GraphSail [2] for RDF4J > but > > > > not a dependency in central repository. I think we should come to a > > consensus for some items, so we can roll out the new Marmotta version. > > > > For experimental backends I've no problem deactivating them if they block > > the migration/development unless someone steps up and volunteers to take > > care of them. > > > > Re. GraphSail - getting a maven artifact to maven-central is not very > > difficult. Often a simple ping/PR to the developer is enough. > > On the other hand - on a first quick glance, the project doesn't look > very > > active and has some limitations (contexts are stored in-memory only?). > But > > again, for an *experimental* backend we could agree to accept them. > > > > Also, what is the issue that has been stopping the Marmotta 3.4 from > being > > > > released? > > > > That's simple: MARMOTTA-668 [4] > > We have a maven plugin that builds the "one-click" installer for > Marmotta. > > However, some changes in maven cause it to break. > > > > > > Best, > > Jakob > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/marmotta/pull/31 < > > > > https://github.com/apache/marmotta/pull/31> > > [2] https://github.com/joshsh/graphsail < > > https://github.com/joshsh/graphsail> > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/junit-team/junit4/wiki/categories > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MARMOTTA-668 > > > > -- > > Jakob Frank > > | http://redlink.at > > | m: +43 699 10588742 <+43%20699%2010588742> <+43%20699%2010588742> | > e: [email protected] > > | http://at.linkedin.com/in/jakobfrank > > > -- Jakob Frank | http://redlink.at | m: +43 699 10588742 | e: [email protected] | http://at.linkedin.com/in/jakobfrank
