[DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Sergio Fernández <se...@salzburgresearch.at>]

Hello everyone,

I would like to propose Commons RDF, a small library providing a common 
API for RDF 1.1. The  current draft of the proposal is here:

   http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF

The main motivation behind this simple library is revise an historical 
incompatibility issue in the Java world. In particular, commons RDF aims 
to provide a type-safe, non-general API that covers RDF 1.1.

The path for the project is clear. But in this phase Commons RDF has to 
focus on the API design, which actively involves developers of existing 
toolkits, so it is better to have a more focused community and 
infrastructure than the Commons Sandbox. Then we have come to the 
conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and then gradually 
prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the larger Apache 
Commons community. Therefore we hope the possible conflict with the name 
of this podling would not been seen as a problem during incubation.

We would gladly welcome additional volunteers to act as mentors on the
project, as well as a champion, preferable someone with any relationship 
with the Apache Common community.

Thanks!
Andy, Peter, Stian, Reto and Sergio

-- 
Sergio Fernández
Senior Researcher
Knowledge and Media Technologies
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925
sergio.fernandez@salzburgresearch.at
http://www.salzburgresearch.at

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> at first sorry for the delay. I've been on vacation the last 10 days with
> no access to my emails.
>

Same for me.

Gary


>
> 2015-02-10 21:31 GMT+01:00 Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
> > > think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
> > > design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
> > > is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
> > > than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
> > > Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
> > > the project goes into maintenance mode.
> >
> > If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough
> > for
> > entering incubation.
> >
>
> Short answer: The Apache Commons community is fine with this.
>
> Long answer: There has been some confusion (and misunderstanding?) about
> the way the Apache Commons project works. The Commons RDF community wanted
> to use either github or a separate mailing list for shaping out the initial
> API. The first in our opinion doesn't work since Apache projects have to
> use Apache infrastructure. The latter wasn't possible since we don't what
> to create sub communities inside commons [1]. This is a lesson learned from
> Jakarta (note that I've not been around by the time Jakarta shout down, so
> I'm just writing down, what I've learned from others). This eventually led
> to the suggestion to go though the incubator. [2]
>
> We like to underline, that we have no experience with the RDF
> specification. From a technical point of view we can help to develop the
> proposed API (according to our design guide lines [3]). But we need the
> people the the RDF space to review contributions from a semantic PoV. So
> this should not end up like developing the RDF library at the incubator and
> then hand it of for maintenance to the Commons community. I think all
> people involved here have pointed out, that they are willing to work on the
> project even after it's initial release. Note, that we have recently
> granted write access to all ASF committers [4]. So if Commons RDF
> eventually moves to Apache Commons, anybody from the Jena/Sesame/Clerezza
> projects may join the development.
>
>
> >
> > I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become
> a
> > TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't
> impact
> > the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
> > effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still
> have
> > PMC
> > members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
> > "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration
> > for
> > this project.
> >
>
> In the case of Commons RDF going TLP we would like to ask the project to
> choose a different name to avoid confusion. But I think this has already
> been discussed in this thread.
>
> Regards,
> Benedikt
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/mnlh64qod7cuuj56
> [2] http://markmail.org/message/wl6hpkb4nhsroro5
> [3] http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
> [4] http://markmail.org/message/ylmw7qzx23br4ver
>
>
> >
> > A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
> > advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal
> in
> > terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for
> Jena
> > and
> > Sesame.
> >
> > In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
> > there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and
> Sesame
> > remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
> > mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
> > their
> > communities.
> >
> > Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?
>
>
> > > === Mailing lists ===
> > >
> > >  * commons-rdf-dev
> > >  * commons-rdf-commits
> >
> > Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might
> > have
> > expected these instead:
> >
> >     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
> >     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
> >
> > Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will
> > traffic
> > be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like
> dev@commons.apache.org
> > and
> > commits@commons.apache.org?
> >
> > >  * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
> > >  * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
> > >  * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
> > >  * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
> > >  * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
> >
> > Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at
> least
> > one
> > Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both
> > IPMC
> > members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
> >
> > You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot
> > going on
> > in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like
> > that
> > you're in good shape. :)
> >
> > === Champion ===
> >
> >  * TBD
> >
> > The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
> > essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role,
> now.
> > Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?
> >
> > > === Nominated Mentors ===
> > >
> > >  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
> > >  * TBD
> >
> > Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the
> IPMC
> > nor
> > an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately
> > it's
> > not a valid nomination.
> >
> > I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is
> > already
> > Jena-heavy?
> >
> > Marvin Humphrey
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://people.apache.org/~britter/
> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
> http://github.com/britter
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> at first sorry for the delay. I've been on vacation the last 10 days with
> no access to my emails.
>

Same for me.

Gary


>
> 2015-02-10 21:31 GMT+01:00 Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
> > > think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
> > > design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
> > > is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
> > > than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
> > > Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
> > > the project goes into maintenance mode.
> >
> > If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough
> > for
> > entering incubation.
> >
>
> Short answer: The Apache Commons community is fine with this.
>
> Long answer: There has been some confusion (and misunderstanding?) about
> the way the Apache Commons project works. The Commons RDF community wanted
> to use either github or a separate mailing list for shaping out the initial
> API. The first in our opinion doesn't work since Apache projects have to
> use Apache infrastructure. The latter wasn't possible since we don't what
> to create sub communities inside commons [1]. This is a lesson learned from
> Jakarta (note that I've not been around by the time Jakarta shout down, so
> I'm just writing down, what I've learned from others). This eventually led
> to the suggestion to go though the incubator. [2]
>
> We like to underline, that we have no experience with the RDF
> specification. From a technical point of view we can help to develop the
> proposed API (according to our design guide lines [3]). But we need the
> people the the RDF space to review contributions from a semantic PoV. So
> this should not end up like developing the RDF library at the incubator and
> then hand it of for maintenance to the Commons community. I think all
> people involved here have pointed out, that they are willing to work on the
> project even after it's initial release. Note, that we have recently
> granted write access to all ASF committers [4]. So if Commons RDF
> eventually moves to Apache Commons, anybody from the Jena/Sesame/Clerezza
> projects may join the development.
>
>
> >
> > I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become
> a
> > TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't
> impact
> > the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
> > effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still
> have
> > PMC
> > members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
> > "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration
> > for
> > this project.
> >
>
> In the case of Commons RDF going TLP we would like to ask the project to
> choose a different name to avoid confusion. But I think this has already
> been discussed in this thread.
>
> Regards,
> Benedikt
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/mnlh64qod7cuuj56
> [2] http://markmail.org/message/wl6hpkb4nhsroro5
> [3] http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
> [4] http://markmail.org/message/ylmw7qzx23br4ver
>
>
> >
> > A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
> > advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal
> in
> > terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for
> Jena
> > and
> > Sesame.
> >
> > In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
> > there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and
> Sesame
> > remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
> > mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
> > their
> > communities.
> >
> > Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?
>
>
> > > === Mailing lists ===
> > >
> > >  * commons-rdf-dev
> > >  * commons-rdf-commits
> >
> > Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might
> > have
> > expected these instead:
> >
> >     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
> >     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
> >
> > Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will
> > traffic
> > be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like
> dev@commons.apache.org
> > and
> > commits@commons.apache.org?
> >
> > >  * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
> > >  * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
> > >  * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
> > >  * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
> > >  * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
> >
> > Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at
> least
> > one
> > Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both
> > IPMC
> > members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
> >
> > You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot
> > going on
> > in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like
> > that
> > you're in good shape. :)
> >
> > === Champion ===
> >
> >  * TBD
> >
> > The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
> > essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role,
> now.
> > Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?
> >
> > > === Nominated Mentors ===
> > >
> > >  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
> > >  * TBD
> >
> > Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the
> IPMC
> > nor
> > an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately
> > it's
> > not a valid nomination.
> >
> > I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is
> > already
> > Jena-heavy?
> >
> > Marvin Humphrey
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://people.apache.org/~britter/
> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
> http://github.com/britter
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

at first sorry for the delay. I've been on vacation the last 10 days with
no access to my emails.

2015-02-10 21:31 GMT+01:00 Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>:

> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
> > think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
> > design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
> > is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
> > than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
> > Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
> > the project goes into maintenance mode.
>
> If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough
> for
> entering incubation.
>

Short answer: The Apache Commons community is fine with this.

Long answer: There has been some confusion (and misunderstanding?) about
the way the Apache Commons project works. The Commons RDF community wanted
to use either github or a separate mailing list for shaping out the initial
API. The first in our opinion doesn't work since Apache projects have to
use Apache infrastructure. The latter wasn't possible since we don't what
to create sub communities inside commons [1]. This is a lesson learned from
Jakarta (note that I've not been around by the time Jakarta shout down, so
I'm just writing down, what I've learned from others). This eventually led
to the suggestion to go though the incubator. [2]

We like to underline, that we have no experience with the RDF
specification. From a technical point of view we can help to develop the
proposed API (according to our design guide lines [3]). But we need the
people the the RDF space to review contributions from a semantic PoV. So
this should not end up like developing the RDF library at the incubator and
then hand it of for maintenance to the Commons community. I think all
people involved here have pointed out, that they are willing to work on the
project even after it's initial release. Note, that we have recently
granted write access to all ASF committers [4]. So if Commons RDF
eventually moves to Apache Commons, anybody from the Jena/Sesame/Clerezza
projects may join the development.


>
> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't impact
> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still have
> PMC
> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration
> for
> this project.
>

In the case of Commons RDF going TLP we would like to ask the project to
choose a different name to avoid confusion. But I think this has already
been discussed in this thread.

Regards,
Benedikt

[1] http://markmail.org/message/mnlh64qod7cuuj56
[2] http://markmail.org/message/wl6hpkb4nhsroro5
[3] http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
[4] http://markmail.org/message/ylmw7qzx23br4ver


>
> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for Jena
> and
> Sesame.
>
> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
> their
> communities.
>
> Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?


> > === Mailing lists ===
> >
> >  * commons-rdf-dev
> >  * commons-rdf-commits
>
> Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might
> have
> expected these instead:
>
>     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>
> Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will
> traffic
> be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org
> and
> commits@commons.apache.org?
>
> >  * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
> >  * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
> >  * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
> >  * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
> >  * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
>
> Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at least
> one
> Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both
> IPMC
> members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
>
> You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot
> going on
> in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like
> that
> you're in good shape. :)
>
> === Champion ===
>
>  * TBD
>
> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
> essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role, now.
> Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?
>
> > === Nominated Mentors ===
> >
> >  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
> >  * TBD
>
> Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the IPMC
> nor
> an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately
> it's
> not a valid nomination.
>
> I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is
> already
> Jena-heavy?
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

at first sorry for the delay. I've been on vacation the last 10 days with
no access to my emails.

2015-02-10 21:31 GMT+01:00 Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>:

> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
> > think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
> > design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
> > is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
> > than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
> > Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
> > the project goes into maintenance mode.
>
> If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough
> for
> entering incubation.
>

Short answer: The Apache Commons community is fine with this.

Long answer: There has been some confusion (and misunderstanding?) about
the way the Apache Commons project works. The Commons RDF community wanted
to use either github or a separate mailing list for shaping out the initial
API. The first in our opinion doesn't work since Apache projects have to
use Apache infrastructure. The latter wasn't possible since we don't what
to create sub communities inside commons [1]. This is a lesson learned from
Jakarta (note that I've not been around by the time Jakarta shout down, so
I'm just writing down, what I've learned from others). This eventually led
to the suggestion to go though the incubator. [2]

We like to underline, that we have no experience with the RDF
specification. From a technical point of view we can help to develop the
proposed API (according to our design guide lines [3]). But we need the
people the the RDF space to review contributions from a semantic PoV. So
this should not end up like developing the RDF library at the incubator and
then hand it of for maintenance to the Commons community. I think all
people involved here have pointed out, that they are willing to work on the
project even after it's initial release. Note, that we have recently
granted write access to all ASF committers [4]. So if Commons RDF
eventually moves to Apache Commons, anybody from the Jena/Sesame/Clerezza
projects may join the development.


>
> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't impact
> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still have
> PMC
> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration
> for
> this project.
>

In the case of Commons RDF going TLP we would like to ask the project to
choose a different name to avoid confusion. But I think this has already
been discussed in this thread.

Regards,
Benedikt

[1] http://markmail.org/message/mnlh64qod7cuuj56
[2] http://markmail.org/message/wl6hpkb4nhsroro5
[3] http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
[4] http://markmail.org/message/ylmw7qzx23br4ver


>
> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for Jena
> and
> Sesame.
>
> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
> their
> communities.
>
> Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?


> > === Mailing lists ===
> >
> >  * commons-rdf-dev
> >  * commons-rdf-commits
>
> Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might
> have
> expected these instead:
>
>     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>
> Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will
> traffic
> be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org
> and
> commits@commons.apache.org?
>
> >  * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
> >  * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
> >  * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
> >  * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
> >  * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
>
> Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at least
> one
> Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both
> IPMC
> members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
>
> You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot
> going on
> in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like
> that
> you're in good shape. :)
>
> === Champion ===
>
>  * TBD
>
> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
> essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role, now.
> Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?
>
> > === Nominated Mentors ===
> >
> >  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
> >  * TBD
>
> Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the IPMC
> nor
> an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately
> it's
> not a valid nomination.
>
> I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is
> already
> Jena-heavy?
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Sergio Fernández <wi...@apache.org>]

On 11/02/15 05:03, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>>> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work
>>> is essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that
>>> role, now.  Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness
>>> to Sesame?
>>
>> Sergio has effectively been the Champion for this proposal, but I guess
>> he's not technically admissible as the Champion needs to be a Member or
>> Director.
>
> It's not uncommon for someone other than the Champion to do most of the
> hard work of drawing up the proposal, honestly.

Lewis John McGibbney (lewismc) has accepted and signed off as our 
Champion :-)

https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF#Champion

We already have two mentors: Benedikt Ritter (britter) and Rob Vesse 
(rvesse). For Rob everything is fine. But Benedikt recently joined 
incubator on behalf Commons because this proposal, and he would need to 
join the IPMC for actually act as a mentor.

In the meantime we short this off, we can stay looking for a third 
mentor, although not blocking us to move forward.

Thanks all of you guys for your support to this proposal!

-- 
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: sergio.fernandez@redlink.co
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Sergio Fernández <wi...@apache.org>]

Hi,

On 11/02/15 05:03, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> How good a fit is this project for Commons?  Is it similar in scope and
> size to other Commons components?  Any comments from current members of
> the Commons community?  Should we be concerned about potential "umbrella
> project" issues, such as degrading signal-to-noise ratio on the Commons
> lists?

We already discussed that at dev@commons.a.o. Commons does not want to 
be an umbrella project, and I completely agree on that. But we cannot 
(yet) consider Commons RDF as a component that fits there (or sandbox), 
since we have to grow the community and evolve the design before been 
prepared to be there.

> Peter, who I see is active in Sesame, indicates that either Reto or Andy
> would be acceptable.  If it would suit the community to have an outsider
> Champion, though, I'm willing to serve.

Personally I'd prefer an outsider. The larger representation of Apache 
Commons here (either as Champion or Mentors) the better for the success 
of the proposal.

>> We were hoping to also get some "RDF neutral" mentors.

+++1

Thanks for the very good feedback, Marvin.


-- 
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: sergio.fernandez@redlink.co
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>]

ATTENTION IPMC!  If anybody is out there wants a low-stress Mentoring gig,
this is it.  And if you're an "RDF neutral" outsider, you'll be helping
this project to achieve its goals, just by showing up.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Right - I think it would be good to leave as a decision to be made by
> the PPMC when we get closer to graduation. One problem with TLP is that
> we would likely need a different name ;-)

So it would be advantageous in some ways to sort this out now.

How good a fit is this project for Commons?  Is it similar in scope and
size to other Commons components?  Any comments from current members of
the Commons community?  Should we be concerned about potential "umbrella
project" issues, such as degrading signal-to-noise ratio on the Commons
lists?

Anybody else care to weigh in on the prospect of graduating a TLP which is
anticipated to have low but sustainable activity?

> Agree, Commons RDF is a slightly different proposal - in a way we need
> the incubator mainly to mature the API (e.g. fight over method names)
> and grow the community, rather than to be a "podling" to learn the
> Apache Way and battle with NOTICE files.

Given who's involved, this is going to be as easy as Mentoring gig as ever
comes around.

It's worth contemplating whether this project should be submitted as a
TLP.  Perhaps the initial group is not quite large enough and there aren't
quite enough Apache Members, and long-term sustainability won't be
established until the API negotiations succeed and the user community
grows -- but still...

>> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work
>> is essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that
>> role, now.  Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness
>> to Sesame?
>
> Sergio has effectively been the Champion for this proposal, but I guess
> he's not technically admissible as the Champion needs to be a Member or
> Director.

It's not uncommon for someone other than the Champion to do most of the
hard work of drawing up the proposal, honestly.  (I coordinated the
drafting of the Lucy Incubator proposal long before I got the Member merit
badge which qualifies me to serve as a Champion.  It was the most
educational activity I've ever undertaken at Apache.)

Peter, who I see is active in Sesame, indicates that either Reto or Andy
would be acceptable.  If it would suit the community to have an outsider
Champion, though, I'm willing to serve.

To be honest there are other tasks around Apache that I need to attend to
and I would rather be the one who hooked you up than take on a formal role
-- so if another outsider is willing I'll stand aside.  But I can't ignore
the cost/benefit ratio here.

> We were hoping to also get some "RDF neutral" mentors.

See above. :)

Marvin Humphrey

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>]

On 10 February 2015 at 20:31, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:

> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't impact
> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still have PMC
> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration for
> this project.

Right - I think it would be good to leave as a decision to be made by
the PPMC when we get closer to graduation. One problem with TLP is
that we would likely need a different name ;-)


> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for Jena and
> Sesame.

Right, the idea is for this to get a common, neutral ground.

Although several of the existing implementations, including Jena and
Clerezza, already have the 'abstract' sense of this API, but Commons
RDF API aims to be common across those, and not to "pick sides".

So we have agreed that the new API has to live outside the bigger frameworks.


> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew their
> communities.

I imagine the API would not evolve much once it stabilizes - there's
only that much maintenance you can do on an Java interface :).

But there are additional things we are trying out, like a simple
reference implementation, compliance tests, and event notifications.

Some general utility functions could also evolve later (e.g. "Copy
complete graph from implementation A to implementation B") - but
during incubation we would want to focus on the core interfaces and
integration with the existing implementations.

As our community evolves, I guess documentation would also play a role
- the API aims to be common across the RDF implementations - therefore
users of the API could be considered a single community (compare with
say the JAXB API) - so some usage documentation and tutorials could be
appropriate. This would however point out to details in the (Apache
and non-Apache) implementations.


> Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might have
> expected these instead:
>
>     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org

My guess is that Sergio just suggested "classic" addresses out of
habit. :-) Personally I would agree with the above.


> Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will traffic
> be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org and
> commits@commons.apache.org?

Right - part of the community building (if we continue the Commons
route) is to gradually move (the decreasing) traffic to the existing
dev@commons lists. Commons don't want to split the community with new
component-specific lists, which we can understand.

However we felt that to start out with growing the Commons RDF
community on dev@commons would be a bit of a challenge (300 to 1000
messages/month!) - so part of the motivation for incubation is to have
a more separate space within Apache while we flesh out API design and
implementation questions - and then whoever "survives" so to speak
should be able to move along as we join @commons. :-)


> Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at least one
> Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both IPMC
> members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
>
> You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot going on
> in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like that
> you're in good shape. :)

Agree, Commons RDF is a slightly different proposal - in a way we need
the incubator mainly to mature the API (e.g. fight over method names)
and grow the community, rather than to be a "podling" to learn the
Apache Way and battle with NOTICE files.

As you see below, though - we still need volunteer mentors.


> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
> essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role, now.
> Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?

Sergio has effectively been the Champion for this proposal, but I
guess he's not technically admissible as the Champion needs to be a
Member or Director.


>> === Nominated Mentors ===
>>
>>  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
>>  * TBD
>
> Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the IPMC nor
> an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately it's
> not a valid nomination.

We pointed this out, we would however still like to keep Benedikt as
an informal mentor and our "Commons" representative - in a way we have
to learn also the "Commons Way".

Voting-wise we have 2 IPMC members already, but obviously it would be
good to have more IPMC folks mentoring so we don't have to 'fish' for
release votes.


> I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is already
> Jena-heavy?

Good idea. :) And not unknown territory for Rob.

So I agree to be careful of getting Jena-heavy (I'm not quite neutral
either), but it would be great to have Rob involved - I'm sure he
would try to keep his clean fresh mentor hat on  - just like I try to
keep my "API user" hat on in this project. :-)

We were hoping to also get some "RDF neutral" mentors.

-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>]

On 11/02/15 08:14, Sergio Fernández wrote:
> On 10/02/15 21:31, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>> If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good
>> enough for
>> entering incubation.
>>
>> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to
>> become a
>> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't
>> impact
>> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
>> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still
>> have PMC
>> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
>> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate
>> aspiration for
>> this project.
>>
>> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
>> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be
>> sub-optimal in
>> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for
>> Jena and
>> Sesame.
>>
>> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
>> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and
>> Sesame
>> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
>> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
>> their
>> communities.
>>
>> Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?
>
> Completely :-)

Yes.

Personally, I'd keep the destination open for both TLP and Apache 
Commons, then see where we are at graduation time. A lot of (good) 
things can happen during incubation.

	Andy

>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Sergio Fernández <wi...@apache.org>]

On 10/02/15 21:31, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough for
> entering incubation.
>
> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't impact
> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still have PMC
> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration for
> this project.
>
> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for Jena and
> Sesame.
>
> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew their
> communities.
>
> Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?

Completely :-)


-- 
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: sergio.fernandez@redlink.co
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Peter Ansell <an...@gmail.com>]

On 11 February 2015 at 07:31, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
>> think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
>> design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
>> is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
>> than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
>> Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
>> the project goes into maintenance mode.
>
> If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough for
> entering incubation.
>
> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't impact
> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still have PMC
> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration for
> this project.
>
> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for Jena and
> Sesame.

I don't think it would be appropriate inside of Jena for similar
reasons, although not just related to Sesame, as there are other JVM
toolkits that we also want to attract in a neutral way. For similar
reasons it wouldn't be appropriate within the other related Apache
projects, although it will likely be used by all of them in the end
(Any23/Marmotta/Stanbol/Clerezza/Taverna).

> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew their
> communities.

Both Jena and Sesame will remain viable for a while to come IMO, based
on the commercial users of both platforms and their respective
communities are both well-established and active.

> Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?
>
>> === Mailing lists ===
>>
>>  * commons-rdf-dev
>>  * commons-rdf-commits
>
> Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might have
> expected these instead:
>
>     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>
> Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will traffic
> be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org and
> commits@commons.apache.org?

I would expect the level of discussion and commits to go down just
after graduation, per our goal to have a stable common interface, so
being then integrating into the main commons dev would be the likely
channel.

However, unlike previous APIs, we do have the advantage of Java-8
default methods, so we can also add to the API while maintaining
backwards compatibility, so we are open for additions even after the
initial version of the API is finalised.

>>  * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
>>  * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
>>  * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
>>  * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
>>  * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
>
> Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at least one
> Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both IPMC
> members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
>
> You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot going on
> in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like that
> you're in good shape. :)
>
> === Champion ===
>
>  * TBD
>
> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
> essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role, now.
> Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?

Sergio has been the Champion from the beginning, but anyone who is at
the right community position from the team would be great.

>> === Nominated Mentors ===
>>
>>  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
>>  * TBD
>
> Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the IPMC nor
> an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately it's
> not a valid nomination.
>
> I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is already
> Jena-heavy?

I don't think that is an issue. Rob Vesse would be very appropriate
for that position IMO given his experience.

Cheers,

Peter

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Sergio Fernández <wi...@apache.org>]

Cool! Thanks, Rob.

On 11/02/15 11:02, Rob Vesse wrote:
> Marvin
>
> Yes I would be willing to be a mentor for this podling if there isn't
> sufficient volunteers and they would be willing to have me
>
> I agree that there is a tendency then to make the podling Jena heavy but I
> have had zero involvement in the Commons RDF effort to date and the API
> they are talking about currently is at a level of a stack that I have
> historically contributed nothing to nor do I particularly use so hopefully
> I would be seen as relatively neutral.  To be honest I wouldn't have the
> bandwidth to get actively involved in the code & design) efforts (nor do I
> particularly want to) and thus would only want to be a mentor.
>
> As you said this would probably be a relatively easy mentoring gig with
> most of the effort being around just keeping an eye on the community to
> sign off and comment on reports and to review release as and when they
> come around.
>
> Rob
>
> On 10/02/2015 20:31, "Marvin Humphrey" <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
>>> think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
>>> design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
>>> is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
>>> than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
>>> Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
>>> the project goes into maintenance mode.
>>
>> If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough
>> for
>> entering incubation.
>>
>> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
>> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't
>> impact
>> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
>> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still
>> have PMC
>> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
>> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration
>> for
>> this project.
>>
>> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
>> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
>> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for
>> Jena and
>> Sesame.
>>
>> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
>> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
>> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
>> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
>> their
>> communities.
>>
>> Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?
>>
>>> === Mailing lists ===
>>>
>>>   * commons-rdf-dev
>>>   * commons-rdf-commits
>>
>> Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might
>> have
>> expected these instead:
>>
>>     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>>     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>>
>> Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will
>> traffic
>> be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org
>> and
>> commits@commons.apache.org?
>>
>>>   * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
>>>   * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
>>>   * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
>>>   * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
>>>   * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
>>
>> Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at
>> least one
>> Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both
>> IPMC
>> members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
>>
>> You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot
>> going on
>> in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like
>> that
>> you're in good shape. :)
>>
>> === Champion ===
>>
>> * TBD
>>
>> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
>> essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role,
>> now.
>> Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?
>>
>>> === Nominated Mentors ===
>>>
>>>   * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
>>>   * TBD
>>
>> Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the
>> IPMC nor
>> an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately
>> it's
>> not a valid nomination.
>>
>> I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is
>> already
>> Jena-heavy?
>>
>> Marvin Humphrey
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

-- 
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: sergio.fernandez@redlink.co
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>]

On 11/02/15 10:02, Rob Vesse wrote:
> Marvin
>
> Yes I would be willing to be a mentor for this podling if there isn't
> sufficient volunteers and they would be willing to have me

Thank you - added! (before you change your mind :-))

> I agree that there is a tendency then to make the podling Jena heavy but I
> have had zero involvement in the Commons RDF effort to date and the API
> they are talking about currently is at a level of a stack that I have
> historically contributed nothing to nor do I particularly use so hopefully
> I would be seen as relatively neutral.  To be honest I wouldn't have the
> bandwidth to get actively involved in the code & design) efforts (nor do I
> particularly want to) and thus would only want to be a mentor.

Understood.

> As you said this would probably be a relatively easy mentoring gig with
> most of the effort being around just keeping an eye on the community to
> sign off and comment on reports and to review release as and when they
> come around.

I hope you'll bring in your experience from other projects, inside and 
outside Apache.

 > On 10/02/2015 20:31, "Marvin Humphrey" <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
(sorry to chop but it's a long way down)
 >> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That
 >> work is essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes
 >> that role, now.

Ack.

 >> Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?

Sergio has done a great job of pulling the proposal together.

I have a one-podling-at-a-time policy and Taverna is already filling the 
slot.

In my experience, champion also gets involved in the initial bootstrap 
tasks, and in this case I would hope we can easily share those tasks around.

	Andy

>
> Rob
>
> On 10/02/2015 20:31, "Marvin Humphrey" <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
>>> think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
>>> design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
>>> is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
>>> than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
>>> Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
>>> the project goes into maintenance mode.
>>
>> If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough
>> for
>> entering incubation.
>>
>> I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
>> TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't
>> impact
>> the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
>> effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still
>> have PMC
>> members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
>> "still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration
>> for
>> this project.
>>
>> A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
>> advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
>> terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for
>> Jena and
>> Sesame.
>>
>> In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
>> there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
>> remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
>> mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
>> their
>> communities.
>>
>> Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?
>>
>>> === Mailing lists ===
>>>
>>>   * commons-rdf-dev
>>>   * commons-rdf-commits
>>
>> Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might
>> have
>> expected these instead:
>>
>>     dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>>     commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>>
>> Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will
>> traffic
>> be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org
>> and
>> commits@commons.apache.org?
>>
>>>   * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
>>>   * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
>>>   * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
>>>   * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
>>>   * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
>>
>> Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at
>> least one
>> Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both
>> IPMC
>> members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
>>
>> You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot
>> going on
>> in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like
>> that
>> you're in good shape. :)
>>
>> === Champion ===
>>
>> * TBD
>>
>> The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
>> essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role,
>> now.
>> Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?
>>
>>> === Nominated Mentors ===
>>>
>>>   * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
>>>   * TBD
>>
>> Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the
>> IPMC nor
>> an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately
>> it's
>> not a valid nomination.
>>
>> I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is
>> already
>> Jena-heavy?
>>
>> Marvin Humphrey
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org>]

Marvin

Yes I would be willing to be a mentor for this podling if there isn't
sufficient volunteers and they would be willing to have me

I agree that there is a tendency then to make the podling Jena heavy but I
have had zero involvement in the Commons RDF effort to date and the API
they are talking about currently is at a level of a stack that I have
historically contributed nothing to nor do I particularly use so hopefully
I would be seen as relatively neutral.  To be honest I wouldn't have the
bandwidth to get actively involved in the code & design) efforts (nor do I
particularly want to) and thus would only want to be a mentor.

As you said this would probably be a relatively easy mentoring gig with
most of the effort being around just keeping an eye on the community to
sign off and comment on reports and to review release as and when they
come around.

Rob

On 10/02/2015 20:31, "Marvin Humphrey" <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:

>On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
>wrote:
>
>> The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
>> think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
>> design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
>> is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
>> than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
>> Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
>> the project goes into maintenance mode.
>
>If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough
>for
>entering incubation.
>
>I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
>TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't
>impact
>the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
>effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still
>have PMC
>members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
>"still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration
>for
>this project.
>
>A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
>advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
>terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for
>Jena and
>Sesame.
>
>In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
>there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
>remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
>mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew
>their
>communities.
>
>Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?
>
>> === Mailing lists ===
>>
>>  * commons-rdf-dev
>>  * commons-rdf-commits
>
>Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might
>have
>expected these instead:
>
>    dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>    commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
>
>Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will
>traffic
>be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org
>and
>commits@commons.apache.org?
>
>>  * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
>>  * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
>>  * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
>>  * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
>>  * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)
>
>Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at
>least one
>Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both
>IPMC
>members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.
>
>You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot
>going on
>in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like
>that
>you're in good shape. :)
>
>=== Champion ===
>
> * TBD
>
>The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
>essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role,
>now.
>Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?
>
>> === Nominated Mentors ===
>>
>>  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
>>  * TBD
>
>Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the
>IPMC nor
>an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately
>it's
>not a valid nomination.
>
>I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is
>already
>Jena-heavy?
>
>Marvin Humphrey
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:

> The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
> think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
> design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
> is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
> than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
> Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
> the project goes into maintenance mode.

If Commons is OK with this, I imagine this is a fine plan -- good enough for
entering incubation.

I also think it would be OK for the project to decide it wants to become a
TLP.  Whether the project joins Commons or becomes its own TLP won't impact
the number of people qualified to work on it.  Some Apache TLPs are
effectively in maintenance mode and have very low activity, but still have PMC
members willing to answer user questions, make security releases and file
"still here" quarterly reports.  That seems like a legitimate aspiration for
this project.

A potential Jena destination also seems as though it would have certain
advantages, though my naive speculation is that it might be sub-optimal in
terms of providing neutral territory for negotiating a common API for Jena and
Sesame.

In any case it seems likely that if the project achieves its design goal,
there will be people willing to work on it as long as both Jena and Sesame
remain viable.  That makes it different from other potential "maintenance
mode" TLPs which are in danger of stagnation because they cannot renew their
communities.

Is that take roughly accurate, Sergio et al?

> === Mailing lists ===
>
>  * commons-rdf-dev
>  * commons-rdf-commits

Those sound like final mailing lists rather than Incubator ones.  I might have
expected these instead:

    dev@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org
    commits@commons-rdf.incubator.apache.org

Do you expect to keep separate mailing lists after graduation, or will traffic
be shunted onto existing Commons mailing list like dev@commons.apache.org and
commits@commons.apache.org?

>  * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
>  * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
>  * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
>  * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
>  * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)

Lots of Apache experience in this group.  Four are PMC members of at least one
Apache project.  Andy and Reto are ASF Members.  Andy and Sergio are both IPMC
members.  Stian is a core contributor of the Taverna podling.

You probably haven't been getting much feedback because there's a lot going on
in the Incubator right now and everybody figures that with a group like that
you're in good shape. :)

=== Champion ===

 * TBD

The Champion's main work is to help formulate the proposal.  That work is
essentially done -- so it doesn't matter too much who takes that role, now.
Are Andy and Reto opting out out as a gesture of openness to Sesame?

> === Nominated Mentors ===
>
>  * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
>  * TBD

Benedikt is a member of the Commons PMC, but he's not a member of the IPMC nor
an Apache Member -- so although Commons input is important, unfortunately it's
not a valid nomination.

I'd nudge newly elected IPMC member Rob Vesse, but maybe the roster is already
Jena-heavy?

Marvin Humphrey

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>]

For your convenience, here's the proposal text for CommonsRDF:

= Apache Commons RDF incubation proposal =

<<TableOfContents()>>

== Status ==

Draft

== Abstract ==

Commons RDF is a set of interfaces for the RDF 1.1 concepts that can
be used to expose common RDF-1.1 concepts using common Java
interfaces.

== Proposal ==

The main motivation behind this simple library is revise an historical
incompatibility issue. This library does not pretend to be a generic
api wrapping those libraries, but a set of interfaces for the RDF 1.1
concepts that can be used to expose common RDF-1.1 concepts using
common Java interfaces. In the initial phase commons-rdf is focused on
a subset of the core concepts defined by RDF-1.1 (URI/IRI, Blank Node,
Literal, Triple, and Graph). In particular, commons RDF aims to
provide a type-safe, non-general API that covers RDF 1.1. In a future
phase we may define interfaces for Datasets and Quads.

The goal is to provide a compact API that could be implemented by the
upcoming versions of the main Java toolkits (Apache Jena 3.0 and
OpenRDF Sesame 4.0) as well as for other libraries (OWLAPI) and other
JVM languages (Banana RDF and so on).


In addition, the project could provide some simple implementations
suitable for some basic scenarios. But the major and established Java
toolkits will always remain the recommend implementations to use.

== Background ==

In the Java world there has been historically an incompatibility issue
between the two major RDF toolkits: Apache Jena and OpenRDF Sesame.
Many libraries have tried to wrap them, but besides technical
considerations, they normally end up being unmaintained.

Together, we came up with the idea of Commons RDF for solving the
incompatibility problem. The community has been in healthy development
at Github, including participants from the major Java RDF toolkits.

The natural path to Apache Commons Sandbox has been studied, but we
think that in this phase of the project, which focuses on the API
design and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it
is better to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Rather
than a new Top-Level Project, the goal is still to graduate as part of
Apache Commons, that is when API has achieve the required maturity and
the project goes into maintenance mode.

Part of the motivation for doing the incubator process would therefore
be to bring together the existing Commons RDF community in the Apache
Way, mature the API, and then gradually prepare the Commons RDF
community for working within the larger Apache Commons community.

== Rationale ==

The library comes from the need for providing a generic and neutral
API for RDF 1.1 that everybody can transparently use without bounding
the design to concrete implementations. It is the result of
cooperation between contributors to the main Java toolkits, and will
try to be available in a timely manner to influence the major version
updates Jena 3.0 and Sesame 4.0.

== Initial Goals ==

 * Evolve the API towards a generalized and agreed shape
 * Bootstrap basic implementations
 * Support the implementation

== Current Status ==

The API is already quite agreed by all involved players, and it's been
started to be prototyped, both by the major toolkits and by simple
implementations.

=== Meritocracy ===

Commons RDF has been completely designed by committee using git
workflows, where every single feature has been discussed based on a
Pull Request. We plan to keep such methodology where the commons
understanding comes first than personal decisions.

=== Community ===

Commons RDF addresses the developers who are working with Semantic Web
technologies in the JVM. The initial committers are core contributors
to that community.

=== Core Developers ===

 * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
 * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
 * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
 * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
 * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)

=== Alignment ===

Commons RDF comes to help in the integration of the different ASF
projects using RDF technologies, where Apache Jena can be integrated
with others which use Sesame (Any123 and Marmotta). In addition,
proposals by other projects (Clerezza and Stanbol) can be also
aligned.

== Known Risks ==

=== Orphaned Products ===

Probably one of the major risks will that the API provided does not
fit well in the development plan of the main Java toolkits. But we try
to minimize such risk by having on board core developers of those
framework, the API will live or die on its own merits.

=== Inexperience with Open Source ===

The committers have large experience with open source development and
ASF communities.

=== Homogeneous Developers ===

The initial list of developers come from five different organizations
and four different countries.

=== Reliance on Salaried Developers ===

Although the project is also in the strategic agenda of project of our
current employers, so far the main development is happening at
volunteer time.

=== Relationships with Other Apache Projects ===

The project really relates with Jena as one of the potential
implementations, with Any23 and Marmotta which are based on Sesame,
and Clerezza, Taverna and Stanbol as projects that may benefit of the
common api.

=== An Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand ===

While we expect the Apache brand may help attract more contributors,
our interests in starting this project is based on the factors
mentioned in the Rationale section.

== Documentation ==

Documentation for the current project can be found at Github:
http://commons-rdf.github.io

== Initial Source ==

The current source code can be found at Github:
https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf

=== Source and Intellectual Property Submission Plan ===

The whole copyright is hold the developers signing this proposal, all
of them already with a ICLA with ASF in place. Current licence is
already Apache Software License 2.0.

=== External Dependencies ===

All current dependencies have Apache compatible licenses, including
MIT, BSD 3-clause, MIT and EPL.

=== Cryptography ===

Does Not Apply.

== Required Resources ==

=== Mailing lists ===

 * commons-rdf-dev
 * commons-rdf-commits

=== Repository ===

 * git://git.apache.org/incubator-commons-rdf.git

=== Issue Tracking ===

 * Jira: COMMONSRDF

=== Other Resources ===

 * Jenkins for builds and test running.
 * Github mirroring with pull request notificiations to dev list

== Initial Committers ==

 * Sergio Fernández (wikier dot apache dot org)
 * Andy Seaborne (andy dot apache dot org)
 * Peter Ansell (ansell dot apache dot org)
 * Stian Soiland-Reyes (stain at apache dot org)
 * Reto Gmür (reto at apache dot org)

=== Affiliations ===

 * Sergio Fernández (Redlink GmbH)
 * Andy Seaborne (Epimorphics Ltd)
 * Peter Ansell (CSIRO)
 * Stian Soiland-Reyes (University of Manchester)
 * Reto Gmür (Berner Fachhochschule)

== Sponsors ==

=== Champion ===

 * TBD

=== Nominated Mentors ===

 * Benedikt Ritter (britter at apache dot org)
 * TBD

=== Sponsoring Entity ===

Apache Incubator PMC


On 10 February 2015 at 10:15, Sergio Fernández
<se...@salzburgresearch.at> wrote:
> I guess, if there is no single aspect to discuss, we can move forward with
> an official vote, right?
>
>
> On 05/02/15 08:49, Sergio Fernández wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I would like to propose Commons RDF, a small library providing a common
>> API for RDF 1.1. The  current draft of the proposal is here:
>>
>>    http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF
>>
>> The main motivation behind this simple library is revise an historical
>> incompatibility issue in the Java world. In particular, commons RDF aims
>> to provide a type-safe, non-general API that covers RDF 1.1.
>>
>> The path for the project is clear. But in this phase Commons RDF has to
>> focus on the API design, which actively involves developers of existing
>> toolkits, so it is better to have a more focused community and
>> infrastructure than the Commons Sandbox. Then we have come to the
>> conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and then gradually
>> prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the larger Apache
>> Commons community. Therefore we hope the possible conflict with the name
>> of this podling would not been seen as a problem during incubation.
>>
>> We would gladly welcome additional volunteers to act as mentors on the
>> project, as well as a champion, preferable someone with any relationship
>> with the Apache Common community.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Andy, Peter, Stian, Reto and Sergio
>>
>
> --
> Sergio Fernández
> Senior Researcher
> Knowledge and Media Technologies
> Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
> Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
> T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925
> sergio.fernandez@salzburgresearch.at
> http://www.salzburgresearch.at
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>



-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Commons RDF to join the Apache Incubator

[Sergio Fernández <se...@salzburgresearch.at>]

I guess, if there is no single aspect to discuss, we can move forward 
with an official vote, right?

On 05/02/15 08:49, Sergio Fernández wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I would like to propose Commons RDF, a small library providing a common
> API for RDF 1.1. The  current draft of the proposal is here:
>
>    http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF
>
> The main motivation behind this simple library is revise an historical
> incompatibility issue in the Java world. In particular, commons RDF aims
> to provide a type-safe, non-general API that covers RDF 1.1.
>
> The path for the project is clear. But in this phase Commons RDF has to
> focus on the API design, which actively involves developers of existing
> toolkits, so it is better to have a more focused community and
> infrastructure than the Commons Sandbox. Then we have come to the
> conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and then gradually
> prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the larger Apache
> Commons community. Therefore we hope the possible conflict with the name
> of this podling would not been seen as a problem during incubation.
>
> We would gladly welcome additional volunteers to act as mentors on the
> project, as well as a champion, preferable someone with any relationship
> with the Apache Common community.
>
> Thanks!
> Andy, Peter, Stian, Reto and Sergio
>

-- 
Sergio Fernández
Senior Researcher
Knowledge and Media Technologies
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925
sergio.fernandez@salzburgresearch.at
http://www.salzburgresearch.at

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org