[jira] [Comment Edited] (JENA-1572) Setup LICENSE and NOTICE files to reflect Jena's "release all" policy.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1572?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16811948#comment-16811948
]
Andy Seaborne edited comment on JENA-1572 at 4/7/19 7:20 PM:
-
The following modules seem to have unnecessary LICENSE and NOTICE files. There
may wel be more - this is a first pass of modules and they look simple with no
included source and no combined binaries.
At the same time DEPENDENCIES can go because the information becomes out of
date with the POM and {{dependency:tree}}.
jena-arq
jena-core
jena-db
jena-integration-tests
jena-iri
jena-jdbc/ and all modules under it
(AspectJ is not used and so isn't necessary: cc [~rvesse])
jena-elephas
jena-permissions
(no need to mention "build" plugin used - no source in repo: cc
[~cla...@xenei.org])
jena-rdfconnection
jena-sdb
jena-spatial
jena-tdb
jena-text-es
jena-text
jena-fuseki2/jena-fuseki-core/
jena-maven-tools
jena-shaded-guava
was (Author: andy.seaborne):
The following modules seem to have unnecessary LICENSE and NOTICE files. There
may wel be more - this is a first pass of modules and they look simple with no
included source and no combined binaries.
At the same time DEPENDENCIES can go because the information becomes out of
date with the POM and {{dependency:tree}}.
jena-arq
jena-core
jena-db
jena-integration-tests
jena-iri
jena-jdbc/ and all modules under it
(AspectJ is not used and so isn't necessary: [~rvesse])
jena-elephas
jena-permissions
(no need to mention "build" plugin used - no source in repo:
jena-rdfconnection
jena-sdb
jena-spatial
jena-tdb
jena-text-es
jena-text
jena-fuseki2/jena-fuseki-core/
jena-maven-tools
jena-shaded-guava
> Setup LICENSE and NOTICE files to reflect Jena's "release all" policy.
> --
>
> Key: JENA-1572
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1572
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Affects Versions: Jena 3.8.0
>Reporter: Andy Seaborne
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: JenaLN.txt
>
>
> The LICENSE and NOTICE files can be tided up. They were setup so individual
> modules can be released by themselves but Jena now releases all modules at
> once.
> See attached file for an assessment of the current (3.8.0) situation.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (JENA-1572) Setup LICENSE and NOTICE files to reflect Jena's "release all" policy.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1572?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16811948#comment-16811948
]
Andy Seaborne commented on JENA-1572:
-
The following modules seem to have unnecessary LICENSE and NOTICE files. There
may wel be more - this is a first pass of modules and they look simple with no
included source and no combined binaries.
At the same time DEPENDENCIES can go because the information becomes out of
date with the POM and {{dependency:tree}}.
jena-arq
jena-core
jena-db
jena-integration-tests
jena-iri
jena-jdbc/ and all modules under it
(AspectJ is not used and so isn't necessary: [~rvesse])
jena-elephas
jena-permissions
(no need to mention "build" plugin used - no source in repo:
jena-rdfconnection
jena-sdb
jena-spatial
jena-tdb
jena-text-es
jena-text
jena-fuseki2/jena-fuseki-core/
jena-maven-tools
jena-shaded-guava
> Setup LICENSE and NOTICE files to reflect Jena's "release all" policy.
> --
>
> Key: JENA-1572
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1572
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Affects Versions: Jena 3.8.0
>Reporter: Andy Seaborne
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: JenaLN.txt
>
>
> The LICENSE and NOTICE files can be tided up. They were setup so individual
> modules can be released by themselves but Jena now releases all modules at
> once.
> See attached file for an assessment of the current (3.8.0) situation.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
Re: Towards Jena 3.11.0
Maven is something I can help with: I took a very quick, preliminary pass and produced: https://gist.github.com/afs/c6c291812bbc96fe55ac64ecdd1edfe4 That does not include every in the gradle file - I added artifact as needed to get "mvn clean verify -Drat.skip=true" to run, nothing more. The one I was unclear about is javax.xml.bind jdom has a unique license - at a quick glance it looks OK but needs checking a to the rest of the dependencies. Their intent is "an Apache-style open source license". Andy org.locationtech.jts:jts-core -- EDL - which is category-A. Redistributions in binary form need the right NOTICE ... except they don't put the necessary files in their own distribution so I'm unclear what the intent is here. Albiston wrote: Apologies for the delayed reply about the GeoSPARQL module. There hasn't been much feedback. The main of note was around supporting equivalent functionality to jena-spatial (property/filter functions, lat/lon predicates and spatial index), which are now included along with some other useful property/filter functions. I'll get onto moving them to Maven etc. but likely next weekend. Thanks, Greg On 03/04/2019 22:33, Marco Neumann wrote: ok sounds reasonable, so I might be able to move along with jena spatial On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 10:28 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: I'm only suggesting removing it from Fuseki, not remove the module. Fuseki merely includes it. Putting it back does not even need repacking: java -cp fuseki-jar:spatial.jar $@ should work - JenaSystem.init will happen and ServiceLoader cause spatial to be available as before. Andy On 03/04/2019 22:11, Marco Neumann wrote: ok Andy, I will prepare for the removal of jena spatial from the jena project. but since I use jena spatial in production it will take a while to switch and I will stay with 3.10 here. what exactly will you do with the code base? just remove the code from the fuseki release and the jena spatial folder in the source? On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 9:17 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: We have three major streams outstanding. Have I missed anything? 1/ GeoSPARQL 2/ Prometheus metrics 3/ SurroundQueryParser == GeoSPARQL Greg - apologies for being tardy on this one. It looks in good shape. Did you hear from anyone after the request for feedback? This is two modules: geosparql-jena and geosparql-fuseki A suggestion for how to proceed if you have the time for 3.11.0 is that we include these basically as-is and remove jena-spatial from Fuseki which we have been signalling for a while. Suggestion: jena-geosparql jena-fuseki/jena-fuseki-geospatial and under org.apache.jena.geosparql and org.apache.jena.fuseki.geosparql It would have to be maven. Documentation: This does not have to timed with the release though desirable to have some instructions on the website. Looking the modules, it has its own specialised Fuseki incarnation with command line arguments and also internally a system wide configuration. maybe, later, we might want to merge the Fuseki setup but exactly how and whether separate is better for users due to the specialised nature can wait. Release should get feedback after it is incorporated - "release early, release often". Greg - how does that sound? PMC - having more eyes on this would be helpful. If the timing is OK, we can work on details on the ticket JENA-664 (or email on dev@). == JENA-1691 : Prometheus metrics This is getting there. We have the code worked out, the packaging needs a bit of discussion; importantly it is missing L changes due to BSD-binaries in the combined jars mean some L changes. == JENA-1690 : SurroundQueryParser Looks like this is ready and waiting for someone to merge it. With all that, it looks like some things to sort out. We can wait a bit longer for 3.11.0, or do 3.11.0 fairly soon with whatever is ready, including getting things in and expect to further refine, then advance the timing on 3.12.0. Thoughts? Andy
[GitHub] [jena] afs commented on issue #534: [WIP] Proof of concept for prometheus endpoint
afs commented on issue #534: [WIP] Proof of concept for prometheus endpoint URL: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/534#issuecomment-480602750 A link in LICENSE is better and acceptable these days. HdrHistogram and LatencyUtils binaries artifacts themselves don't include a LICENSE or NOTICE file (these would automatically get rolled up by the shader). This is the LICENSE to end up in the convenience binaries, not the Jena one; nothing to do there - no "other license" source in the jena source codebase. And because it is the convenience binaries, and licenses with no attribute requirement, do we need to do anything? This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org With regards, Apache Git Services
Re: [DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
So using web.archive.org [1] I can track changes to the project name from "Jena" to "Jena Apache - TDB" in db rankings between the end of October 2018 and November 2018. Which is also, I presume, the string that is used to automate the methodology mentioned above. This also could explain the drop (85->118) in rankings which occurred between November 2018 and April 2019. [1] http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://db-engines.com/en/ranking On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 4:00 PM Marco Neumann wrote: > > :D > certainly prejudice here, or it's a New York thing only. > > just to mention their methodology[1] to do the ranking here: > > * Number of mentions of the system on websites, measured as number of > results in search engines queries. At the moment, we use Google, Bing > and Yandex for this measurement. In order to count only relevant > results, we are searching for together with the term > database, e.g. "Oracle" and "database". > > * General interest in the system. For this measurement, we use the > frequency of searches in Google Trends. > > * Frequency of technical discussions about the system. We use the > number of related questions and the number of interested users on the > well-known IT-related Q sites Stack Overflow and DBA Stack Exchange. > > * Number of job offers, in which the system is mentioned. We use the > number of offers on the leading job search engines Indeed and Simply > Hired. > > * Number of profiles in professional networks, in which the system is > mentioned.We use the internationally most popular professional > networks LinkedIn and Upwork. > > * Relevance in social networks. We count the number of Twitter tweets, > in which the system is mentioned. > > [1] https://db-engines.com/en/ranking_definition > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 3:47 PM ajs6f wrote: > > > > I don't really see in what sense Jena competes with Oracle or MySQL (top > > two listings) or for that matter, Google Cloud Spanner (?), ClickHouse (?), > > or Apache Drill. > > > > I'll admit, I'm a little annoyed by being outranked by something called > > "CockroachDB", but that's probably just a bit of prejudice on my part. > > > > ajs6f > > > > > On Apr 7, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Marco Neumann > > > wrote: > > > > > > maybe somewhat related. I have noticed that the Jena project was the > > > biggest loser in the db-engines ranking for the year ending in April > > > 2019. > > > > > > https://db-engines.com/en/ranking > > > > > > https://db-engines.com/en/system/Apache+Jena+-+TDB > > > > > > Jena is now down to place 118 from 85 in April 2018. I have very > > > briefly discussed this with Andy Seaborne but would like to hear from > > > dev list members on this and the db ranking in general. > > > > > > Is there anything we can learn from this that would help us to raise > > > visibility and recognition of the project? Should the ranking be > > > ignored? > > > > > > Marco > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 1:36 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: > > >> > > >> FYI: This month we got weevils and hedgehogs. > > >> > > >> The report generator puts in default text: > > >> > > >> ## Issues: > > >> - TODO - list any issues that require board attention, > > >> or say "there are no issues requiring board attention at this time" > > >>- if not, the weevils will get you. > > >> > > >> > > >> ## Health report: > > >> - TODO - Please use this paragraph to elaborate on why > > >>the current project activity (mails, commits, bugs etc) is at its > > >>current level - Maybe hedgehogs took over and are now controlling > > >>the project? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> - > > >> > > >> More mundanely: > > >> > > >> - > > >> > > >> ## Description: > > >> > > >> Jena is a framework for developing Semantic Web and Linked Data > > >> applications in Java. It provides implementation of W3C standards for > > >> RDF and SPARQL. > > >> > > >> ## Issues: > > >> > > >> There are no issues requiring board attention at this time. > > >> > > >> ## Activity: > > >> > > >> The project has continued to evolve the codebase. It is still in the > > >> process of incorporating the significant contribution of a GeoSPARQL, > > >> mainly restricted by PMC members bandwidth. > > >> > > >> Elsewhere, a new contribution of metrics support for the Jena Fuseki, > > >> triplestore protocol engine, has been received and the project is > > >> working with the contributor to incorporate that. > > >> > > >> Discussion of release 3.11.0 has started. > > >> > > >> ## Health report: > > >> > > >> The project is at normal levels of activity, with JIRA and git pull > > >> requests getting being responded to, and the users list remains active. > > >> > > >> ## PMC changes: > > >> > > >> - Currently 14 PMC members. > > >> - Aaron Coburn was added to the PMC on Tue Jan 22 2019 > > >> > > >> ## Committer base changes: > > >> > > >> - Currently 17 committers. > > >> - No new committers added in the last 3 months > > >> - Last
Re: [DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
:D certainly prejudice here, or it's a New York thing only. just to mention their methodology[1] to do the ranking here: * Number of mentions of the system on websites, measured as number of results in search engines queries. At the moment, we use Google, Bing and Yandex for this measurement. In order to count only relevant results, we are searching for together with the term database, e.g. "Oracle" and "database". * General interest in the system. For this measurement, we use the frequency of searches in Google Trends. * Frequency of technical discussions about the system. We use the number of related questions and the number of interested users on the well-known IT-related Q sites Stack Overflow and DBA Stack Exchange. * Number of job offers, in which the system is mentioned. We use the number of offers on the leading job search engines Indeed and Simply Hired. * Number of profiles in professional networks, in which the system is mentioned.We use the internationally most popular professional networks LinkedIn and Upwork. * Relevance in social networks. We count the number of Twitter tweets, in which the system is mentioned. [1] https://db-engines.com/en/ranking_definition On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 3:47 PM ajs6f wrote: > > I don't really see in what sense Jena competes with Oracle or MySQL (top two > listings) or for that matter, Google Cloud Spanner (?), ClickHouse (?), or > Apache Drill. > > I'll admit, I'm a little annoyed by being outranked by something called > "CockroachDB", but that's probably just a bit of prejudice on my part. > > ajs6f > > > On Apr 7, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Marco Neumann wrote: > > > > maybe somewhat related. I have noticed that the Jena project was the > > biggest loser in the db-engines ranking for the year ending in April > > 2019. > > > > https://db-engines.com/en/ranking > > > > https://db-engines.com/en/system/Apache+Jena+-+TDB > > > > Jena is now down to place 118 from 85 in April 2018. I have very > > briefly discussed this with Andy Seaborne but would like to hear from > > dev list members on this and the db ranking in general. > > > > Is there anything we can learn from this that would help us to raise > > visibility and recognition of the project? Should the ranking be > > ignored? > > > > Marco > > > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 1:36 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: > >> > >> FYI: This month we got weevils and hedgehogs. > >> > >> The report generator puts in default text: > >> > >> ## Issues: > >> - TODO - list any issues that require board attention, > >> or say "there are no issues requiring board attention at this time" > >>- if not, the weevils will get you. > >> > >> > >> ## Health report: > >> - TODO - Please use this paragraph to elaborate on why > >>the current project activity (mails, commits, bugs etc) is at its > >>current level - Maybe hedgehogs took over and are now controlling > >>the project? > >> > >> > >> > >> - > >> > >> More mundanely: > >> > >> - > >> > >> ## Description: > >> > >> Jena is a framework for developing Semantic Web and Linked Data > >> applications in Java. It provides implementation of W3C standards for > >> RDF and SPARQL. > >> > >> ## Issues: > >> > >> There are no issues requiring board attention at this time. > >> > >> ## Activity: > >> > >> The project has continued to evolve the codebase. It is still in the > >> process of incorporating the significant contribution of a GeoSPARQL, > >> mainly restricted by PMC members bandwidth. > >> > >> Elsewhere, a new contribution of metrics support for the Jena Fuseki, > >> triplestore protocol engine, has been received and the project is > >> working with the contributor to incorporate that. > >> > >> Discussion of release 3.11.0 has started. > >> > >> ## Health report: > >> > >> The project is at normal levels of activity, with JIRA and git pull > >> requests getting being responded to, and the users list remains active. > >> > >> ## PMC changes: > >> > >> - Currently 14 PMC members. > >> - Aaron Coburn was added to the PMC on Tue Jan 22 2019 > >> > >> ## Committer base changes: > >> > >> - Currently 17 committers. > >> - No new committers added in the last 3 months > >> - Last committer addition was Aaron Coburn at Mon Jun 18 2018 > >> > >> ## Releases: > >> > >> - Last release was 3.10.0 on Sun Dec 30 2018 > >> > >> ## JIRA activity: > >> > >> - 45 JIRA tickets created in the last 3 months > >> - 31 JIRA tickets closed/resolved in the last 3 months > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > > > --- > > Marco Neumann > > KONA > -- --- Marco Neumann KONA
Re: [DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
I don't really see in what sense Jena competes with Oracle or MySQL (top two listings) or for that matter, Google Cloud Spanner (?), ClickHouse (?), or Apache Drill. I'll admit, I'm a little annoyed by being outranked by something called "CockroachDB", but that's probably just a bit of prejudice on my part. ajs6f > On Apr 7, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Marco Neumann wrote: > > maybe somewhat related. I have noticed that the Jena project was the > biggest loser in the db-engines ranking for the year ending in April > 2019. > > https://db-engines.com/en/ranking > > https://db-engines.com/en/system/Apache+Jena+-+TDB > > Jena is now down to place 118 from 85 in April 2018. I have very > briefly discussed this with Andy Seaborne but would like to hear from > dev list members on this and the db ranking in general. > > Is there anything we can learn from this that would help us to raise > visibility and recognition of the project? Should the ranking be > ignored? > > Marco > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 1:36 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: >> >> FYI: This month we got weevils and hedgehogs. >> >> The report generator puts in default text: >> >> ## Issues: >> - TODO - list any issues that require board attention, >> or say "there are no issues requiring board attention at this time" >>- if not, the weevils will get you. >> >> >> ## Health report: >> - TODO - Please use this paragraph to elaborate on why >>the current project activity (mails, commits, bugs etc) is at its >>current level - Maybe hedgehogs took over and are now controlling >>the project? >> >> >> >> - >> >> More mundanely: >> >> - >> >> ## Description: >> >> Jena is a framework for developing Semantic Web and Linked Data >> applications in Java. It provides implementation of W3C standards for >> RDF and SPARQL. >> >> ## Issues: >> >> There are no issues requiring board attention at this time. >> >> ## Activity: >> >> The project has continued to evolve the codebase. It is still in the >> process of incorporating the significant contribution of a GeoSPARQL, >> mainly restricted by PMC members bandwidth. >> >> Elsewhere, a new contribution of metrics support for the Jena Fuseki, >> triplestore protocol engine, has been received and the project is >> working with the contributor to incorporate that. >> >> Discussion of release 3.11.0 has started. >> >> ## Health report: >> >> The project is at normal levels of activity, with JIRA and git pull >> requests getting being responded to, and the users list remains active. >> >> ## PMC changes: >> >> - Currently 14 PMC members. >> - Aaron Coburn was added to the PMC on Tue Jan 22 2019 >> >> ## Committer base changes: >> >> - Currently 17 committers. >> - No new committers added in the last 3 months >> - Last committer addition was Aaron Coburn at Mon Jun 18 2018 >> >> ## Releases: >> >> - Last release was 3.10.0 on Sun Dec 30 2018 >> >> ## JIRA activity: >> >> - 45 JIRA tickets created in the last 3 months >> - 31 JIRA tickets closed/resolved in the last 3 months >> > > > -- > > > --- > Marco Neumann > KONA
Re: [DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
LGTM, two possible typos as shown below. ajs6f > On Apr 7, 2019, at 8:35 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > The project has continued to evolve the codebase. It is still in the process > of incorporating the significant contribution of a GeoSPARQL, mainly > restricted by PMC members bandwidth. "a GeoSPARQ" = "a GeoSPARQ implementation" or "a GeoSPARQ module"? > Elsewhere, a new contribution of metrics support for the Jena Fuseki, > triplestore protocol engine, has been received and the project is working > with the contributor to incorporate that. "for the Jena Fuseki, triplestore protocol engine" => "for the Jena Fuseki triplestore protocol engine"
[DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
FYI: This month we got weevils and hedgehogs. The report generator puts in default text: ## Issues: - TODO - list any issues that require board attention, or say "there are no issues requiring board attention at this time" - if not, the weevils will get you. ## Health report: - TODO - Please use this paragraph to elaborate on why the current project activity (mails, commits, bugs etc) is at its current level - Maybe hedgehogs took over and are now controlling the project? - More mundanely: - ## Description: Jena is a framework for developing Semantic Web and Linked Data applications in Java. It provides implementation of W3C standards for RDF and SPARQL. ## Issues: There are no issues requiring board attention at this time. ## Activity: The project has continued to evolve the codebase. It is still in the process of incorporating the significant contribution of a GeoSPARQL, mainly restricted by PMC members bandwidth. Elsewhere, a new contribution of metrics support for the Jena Fuseki, triplestore protocol engine, has been received and the project is working with the contributor to incorporate that. Discussion of release 3.11.0 has started. ## Health report: The project is at normal levels of activity, with JIRA and git pull requests getting being responded to, and the users list remains active. ## PMC changes: - Currently 14 PMC members. - Aaron Coburn was added to the PMC on Tue Jan 22 2019 ## Committer base changes: - Currently 17 committers. - No new committers added in the last 3 months - Last committer addition was Aaron Coburn at Mon Jun 18 2018 ## Releases: - Last release was 3.10.0 on Sun Dec 30 2018 ## JIRA activity: - 45 JIRA tickets created in the last 3 months - 31 JIRA tickets closed/resolved in the last 3 months
