Who manages the ASF parent pom.xml? INFRA? Perhaps we can help move it forward?
ajs6f
Claude Warren wrote on 10/20/17 11:18 PM:
Not really an immediate need so much as just wondering how close our code
is to working under Java 9. I think it would also be nice to know when the
various tools
Not really an immediate need so much as just wondering how close our code
is to working under Java 9. I think it would also be nice to know when the
various tools we use are Java 9 ready and perhaps lend them a hand if need
be. More curiosity than anything else.
Claude
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at
Perhaps the first line of work could be to contact the authors and ask them:
Did you contact Jena (or for that matter, any of the other projects) for this work? Why did you use such an old version
of Jena?
Would you be willing to try again with a modern version? If the results are
I wouldn’t want you to derail yourself from spending time at whatever sessions
are most relevant to yourself
Perhaps we as a PMC could draft a general statement about responsible
disclosure and submit it to the workshop organisers asking them to raise the
topic as part of their workshop. We
Hi all,
just to clarify, so far I didn't contact the authors.
Right now I'm trying to reproduce the experiments but it looks like I'd
need some more details:
* did they use the Jena in-memory engine or was it TDB?
* did they increase the Java heap space? when using the CLI of Jena, the
I received this via LinkedIn:
---
Good morning Andy,
I just wanted to say thank you for Jena to you and your Team.
All the best,
Paolo
Paolo Gallo
---
Claude - you can see branches that exist via the GH interface.
And, no, theer isn't one.
There is a jenkins job - it does not work, waiting in updates to roll
through. Taking over version mgt of the plugins from the ASF parent
seems to me like extra work for little benefit.
Unless there is
On 20/10/2017 15:56, "Andy Seaborne" wrote:
Given this, references to the 2015 are spurious and misleading.
If you read the original bachelors thesis that Marco referenced [1] the
equivalent text and the footnote is as follows:
3 https://jena.apache.org/
They say:
... Apache Jena 3.0.1 [7] ...
[7] https://jena.apache.org/ retrieved at 3.7.2017
but 3/July/17 is 3.3.0 which has JENA-1195 fixed (in Jena 3.1.1) which
is careless and invalidates their figures.
Given this, references to the 2015 are spurious and misleading.
But is
On 20/10/17 11:13, Rob Vesse wrote:
On 20/10/2017 15:56, "Andy Seaborne" wrote:
Given this, references to the 2015 are spurious and misleading.
If you read the original bachelors thesis that Marco referenced [1] the
equivalent text and the footnote is as follows:
Hi,
I’m interested in looking into whether and how it might be possible to
incorporate Lucene highlighting into jena-text. I don’t see any other work, but
perhaps others have dealt with the topic already. I was thinking of some sort
of a 4th return parameter in the PF.
While examining the
11 matches
Mail list logo