[GitHub] jena pull request: Apache jena osgi
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/24 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
Re: [GitHub] jena pull request: Apache jena osgi
I'm trying to deal with pull requests in submission order. I have pulled #24 but when I tried to pull #25, I got several merge conflicts that were not obvious as to how they should be resolved. I suspect it is because #24 was revised but #25 is relative to an older #24 state. The result was a truly messed up local repository. The #25 commits were in a mixed chronological order with regard to #24, mixed with other separate activity in master and because there are a lot of small commits. Current state: All pull requests except #25 and #22 have been pulled. #22 (NOTICE) needs setting and aligning with a LICENCE, and coupled to what gets into the binary artifacts. I didn't find dealing with one part of without coordination with all the necessary changes very helpful and I prefer to leave the use of any autogenerated files until all are ready. And I can't run mvn verify in apache-jena-osgi. Andy On 03/02/15 11:54, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: I'm sorry, it is difficult to make a pull request be compatible with other pull request as I can't tell in advance the merge order, and I didn't want the file renames to go the wrong way around. If you want I can recreate #24 from scratch now that you have merged the #21 and #23. (Thank you!). You don't need the close #24 as I can do an evil git push --force. Or we can just let the dual-modules jena-osgi and jena-osgi-test stay for the 2.13.0 release. The idea of #24 was not to add a OSGi binary distribution build (although it would leave an obvious place for it), it just reorganized the modules as you suggested. So for NOTICE/LICENSE, we can do that as a separate thread, although I thought the stub from #22 would be sufficient for now as it covers exactly the content of the bundle JAR (*.jena, xerces and xml-apis), and the NOTICE file of apache-jena/ is also done manually. (which does lead to a maintenance problem, I agree). To generate NOTICE automatically by Maven can be done, but I'm not very skilled in the magic here - perhaps others know more. For jena-osgi the challenge is to play with those scopes so that it's picks up the correct licenses - we don't want to declare any NOTICE for say HTTP Components as that is an external dependency that is not included in the bundle binary. On 2 February 2015 at 19:23, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote: On 02/02/15 17:45, stain wrote: GitHub user stain opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/24 Apache jena osgi Builds on #21 by splitting out jena-osgi* to submodules under `apache-jena-osgi`. Merges in #21, #22, #23 Combined pull requests are harder to work with. They are extra work if not all the merged PRs are accepted without change. I'm pulling (and fixing up) #21 and #23 now and have just pushed them intot he Apache repo. #22 needs refining and discussion and it's very important (+ NOTICE doesn't look right to me and there is no LICENSE; maybe autogenerated works but that's yet more manual checking to do for a build that takes 30mins from clean). So I would need to unpick #24. Time consuming, which is why I asked not to do that. I'm sorry if I can't deal with these fast enough for you but the extra work in processing them, sending emails as well as having £work to do makes me slow. My ideal situation is to close #22 and #24 for now. We start with a new baseline of the repo as it is at this moment, post #21 and #23. We *discuss* what needs to be done for the NOTICE+LICENSE on dev@. You can PR a rename though I was hoping for other commentary on that as well. It might be easier to do after NL is done. Andy
Re: [GitHub] jena pull request: Apache jena osgi
I'm sorry, it is difficult to make a pull request be compatible with other pull request as I can't tell in advance the merge order, and I didn't want the file renames to go the wrong way around. If you want I can recreate #24 from scratch now that you have merged the #21 and #23. (Thank you!). You don't need the close #24 as I can do an evil git push --force. Or we can just let the dual-modules jena-osgi and jena-osgi-test stay for the 2.13.0 release. The idea of #24 was not to add a OSGi binary distribution build (although it would leave an obvious place for it), it just reorganized the modules as you suggested. So for NOTICE/LICENSE, we can do that as a separate thread, although I thought the stub from #22 would be sufficient for now as it covers exactly the content of the bundle JAR (*.jena, xerces and xml-apis), and the NOTICE file of apache-jena/ is also done manually. (which does lead to a maintenance problem, I agree). To generate NOTICE automatically by Maven can be done, but I'm not very skilled in the magic here - perhaps others know more. For jena-osgi the challenge is to play with those scopes so that it's picks up the correct licenses - we don't want to declare any NOTICE for say HTTP Components as that is an external dependency that is not included in the bundle binary. On 2 February 2015 at 19:23, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote: On 02/02/15 17:45, stain wrote: GitHub user stain opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/24 Apache jena osgi Builds on #21 by splitting out jena-osgi* to submodules under `apache-jena-osgi`. Merges in #21, #22, #23 Combined pull requests are harder to work with. They are extra work if not all the merged PRs are accepted without change. I'm pulling (and fixing up) #21 and #23 now and have just pushed them intot he Apache repo. #22 needs refining and discussion and it's very important (+ NOTICE doesn't look right to me and there is no LICENSE; maybe autogenerated works but that's yet more manual checking to do for a build that takes 30mins from clean). So I would need to unpick #24. Time consuming, which is why I asked not to do that. I'm sorry if I can't deal with these fast enough for you but the extra work in processing them, sending emails as well as having £work to do makes me slow. My ideal situation is to close #22 and #24 for now. We start with a new baseline of the repo as it is at this moment, post #21 and #23. We *discuss* what needs to be done for the NOTICE+LICENSE on dev@. You can PR a rename though I was hoping for other commentary on that as well. It might be easier to do after NL is done. Andy -- Stian Soiland-Reyes, eScience Lab School of Computer Science The University of Manchester http://soiland-reyes.com/stian/work/http://orcid.org/-0001-9842-9718
[GitHub] jena pull request: Apache jena osgi
GitHub user stain opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/24 Apache jena osgi Builds on #21 by splitting out jena-osgi* to submodules under `apache-jena-osgi`. Merges in #21, #22, #23 You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/stain/jena apache-jena-osgi Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/24.patch To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch with (at least) the following in the commit message: This closes #24 commit 35a3f1de5708f54ee7a776ae9bfbdf8b02be89da Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T10:41:17Z Remove outdated jsonld comments commit be3b4a8975a0b3c5ac99a00278ef9cf4d082ab6c Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T10:54:01Z Move jena-osgi* to apache-jena-osgi/ commit f468945991eac63ce5d1a19fda81c7386823ec4d Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T10:54:47Z 15s = 15000 ms commit d9fb7405d6a335278dce620ab63dcd3342e6551e Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T11:06:21Z rat: exclude anything in target/, not just .plxarc commit dbf38d80ee955261f0dd915b8558c2bd0a3e7e0c Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T11:45:04Z NOTICE .. but only for things included in JAR, e.g. xercesImpl and org.apache.jena.* commit d5e30c4f137e7b0953f71f923088ac4469c1760b Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T11:58:47Z jna.nosys - avoid JNA error commit 5a89500065853f198e3b29b2c9d40d9c08e3c907 Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T17:35:29Z NOTICE file for jena-osgi stripped version of apache-jena/NOTICE commit 77e99e5e4cb6acf3330f875f7e353fc65b5d3e6a Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T17:36:34Z rat: exlude anything under target/* commit 9af39d4e2548146422069374689d41b550d47c87 Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T17:38:28Z Remove jsonld-comment commit aeff7c29e3022012cf313e845b94ea4c1f417af1 Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T17:38:50Z 15s = 15000s, jna.nosys=true commit e499b1f1798e3e044570be199f5bb08fdec2f6f2 Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T17:43:26Z Merge branch 'jena-osgi-tidy' into apache-jena-osgi commit 5bd3a24c7b7de8044fb558ff888c7ab526f73bcd Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T17:43:32Z Merge branch 'jena-osgi-NOTICE' into apache-jena-osgi commit ce26b3c2cb489c31eae9e14acb2608fcaca3371b Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes st...@apache.org Date: 2015-02-02T17:43:36Z Merge branch 'parent-rat-exclude-target' into apache-jena-osgi --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
Re: [GitHub] jena pull request: Apache jena osgi
On 02/02/15 17:45, stain wrote: GitHub user stain opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/24 Apache jena osgi Builds on #21 by splitting out jena-osgi* to submodules under `apache-jena-osgi`. Merges in #21, #22, #23 Combined pull requests are harder to work with. They are extra work if not all the merged PRs are accepted without change. I'm pulling (and fixing up) #21 and #23 now and have just pushed them intot he Apache repo. #22 needs refining and discussion and it's very important (+ NOTICE doesn't look right to me and there is no LICENSE; maybe autogenerated works but that's yet more manual checking to do for a build that takes 30mins from clean). So I would need to unpick #24. Time consuming, which is why I asked not to do that. I'm sorry if I can't deal with these fast enough for you but the extra work in processing them, sending emails as well as having £work to do makes me slow. My ideal situation is to close #22 and #24 for now. We start with a new baseline of the repo as it is at this moment, post #21 and #23. We *discuss* what needs to be done for the NOTICE+LICENSE on dev@. You can PR a rename though I was hoping for other commentary on that as well. It might be easier to do after NL is done. Andy
