Re: [DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
Thanks Marco! On 16/04/2019 12:07, Marco Neumann wrote: FYI quick update on the db-engines.com ranking issue. Today I had a call with Matthias Gelbmann from solid IT who runs the benchmarks at db-engines.com together with Paul Andlinger. After some debate about the Jena design / architecture and negotiation he promised me to change the ranking conditions for jena again to include non TDB related signals in the Jena benchmark results. This in itself should markedly improve ranking again for Jena. The label "Apache Jena TDB" will for now continue to be used on the site until some internal review at db-engines.com might change that. Regards, Marco On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 5:53 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: Marco - Good investigation. Andy On 07/04/2019 16:24, Marco Neumann wrote: 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: -
Re: [DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
FYI quick update on the db-engines.com ranking issue. Today I had a call with Matthias Gelbmann from solid IT who runs the benchmarks at db-engines.com together with Paul Andlinger. After some debate about the Jena design / architecture and negotiation he promised me to change the ranking conditions for jena again to include non TDB related signals in the Jena benchmark results. This in itself should markedly improve ranking again for Jena. The label "Apache Jena TDB" will for now continue to be used on the site until some internal review at db-engines.com might change that. Regards, Marco On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 5:53 PM Andy Seaborne wrote: > > Marco - Good investigation. > > Andy > > On 07/04/2019 16:24, Marco Neumann wrote: > > 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. > > > > ##
Re: [DRAFT] Apache Jena Report : April 2019
Marco - Good investigation. Andy On 07/04/2019 16:24, Marco Neumann wrote: 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 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
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
