You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@stanbol.apache.org by Fabian Christ <ch...@googlemail.com> on 2011/07/11 14:47:10 UTC
[Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Hi,
the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
official Stanbol release at the same time.
Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011
I think we should use the Stanbol "stable" launcher as a reference for
this release. Everything included in this launcher would be part of
the release.
WDYT?
Best,
--
Fabian
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Enrico Daga <en...@gmail.com>.
On 12 July 2011 11:29, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Enrico,
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Enrico Daga <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12 July 2011 10:37, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <re...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> ...The requirement that all dependencies must be in central isn't apache
>>> specific, any artifact in central must satisfy this requirement (maven
>>> central is self-contained).
>
>> Does it mean we cannot have embedded local repositories?
>> Actually this is the only way to include some libraries such owlapi
>> (recently with apache compatible license), which is mandatory for all
>> ontology-based modules. I knew release on maven central to be in plan,
>> but I don't know the status about it....
>
> I think having an embedded local repository is fine as a temporary fix.
>
> Do we have a JIRA issue that reminds us to fix this once the owlapi
> situation is clearer?
Opened right now: STANBOL-265 and STANBOL-266 (I have divided the
issues because they affect different modules)
>
>>
>> Another aspect is related to LGPL dependencies. If I am not wrong we
>> cannot include lgpl dependencies even in incubator/alpha releases,
>> right?
>> If this is the case we must support Jena as default reasoner asap if
>> we want to deliver the reasoners module (I would like it to happen)....
>
> According to http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html LGPL dependencies
> cannot be included.
>
> Unless this can be fixed quickly, we could make a first release
> without the parts that have LGPL dependencies.
Don't know if STANBOL-185 (Jena reasoner as default) will be fixed in
time for the release, even if I would like to.
Enrico
>
> -Bertrand
>
--
Enrico Daga
--
http://www.enridaga.net
skype: enri-pan
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi Enrico,
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Enrico Daga <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 July 2011 10:37, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <re...@apache.org> wrote:
>> ...The requirement that all dependencies must be in central isn't apache
>> specific, any artifact in central must satisfy this requirement (maven
>> central is self-contained).
> Does it mean we cannot have embedded local repositories?
> Actually this is the only way to include some libraries such owlapi
> (recently with apache compatible license), which is mandatory for all
> ontology-based modules. I knew release on maven central to be in plan,
> but I don't know the status about it....
I think having an embedded local repository is fine as a temporary fix.
Do we have a JIRA issue that reminds us to fix this once the owlapi
situation is clearer?
>
> Another aspect is related to LGPL dependencies. If I am not wrong we
> cannot include lgpl dependencies even in incubator/alpha releases,
> right?
> If this is the case we must support Jena as default reasoner asap if
> we want to deliver the reasoners module (I would like it to happen)....
According to http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html LGPL dependencies
cannot be included.
Unless this can be fixed quickly, we could make a first release
without the parts that have LGPL dependencies.
-Bertrand
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Enrico Daga <en...@gmail.com>.
On 12 July 2011 10:37, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <re...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2011 6:56 AM, "Fabian Christ" <ch...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2011/7/11 Rupert Westenthaler <ru...@gmail.com>:
>> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>> > <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Fabian Christ
>> >> <ch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >>> ...the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
>> >>> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
>> >>> official Stanbol release at the same time.
>> >>>
>> >>> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011...
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> > Fabian, would you take the lead of this process?
>>
>> Yes, I can do that since I'm also working on the IKS release.
>>
>> > When we where in Paris Reto mentioned also some other things. I can no
>> > longer remember all the points but one was that all mvn dependencies
>> > must be available on mvn central and/or the apache mvn servers.
>> >
>> > Maybe Reto can write (or link to) a short How-do. He is currently
>> > preparing the first release of clerezza and should have a lot of
>> > valuable information to share.
>>
>> Is Reto on this list? Otherwise I will try to contact him directly.
>
> Present!
>
> The requirement that all dependencies must be in central isn't apache
> specific, any artifact in central must satisfy this requirement (maven
> central is self-contained).
Does it mean we cannot have embedded local repositories?
Actually this is the only way to include some libraries such owlapi
(recently with apache compatible license), which is mandatory for all
ontology-based modules. I knew release on maven central to be in plan,
but I don't know the status about it.
Another aspect is related to LGPL dependencies. If I am not wrong we
cannot include lgpl dependencies even in incubator/alpha releases,
right?
If this is the case we must support Jena as default reasoner asap if
we want to deliver the reasoners module (I would like it to happen).
Enrico
>
> I've just started a release vote on clerezza. A first attempt, all that goes
> wrong could then become part of a howto :)
>
> Reto
>
>>
>> -- Fabian
>
--
Enrico Daga
--
http://www.enridaga.net
skype: enri-pan
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Reto Bachmann-Gmür <re...@apache.org>.
On Jul 12, 2011 6:56 AM, "Fabian Christ" <ch...@googlemail.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> 2011/7/11 Rupert Westenthaler <ru...@gmail.com>:
> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> > <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Fabian Christ
> >> <ch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>> ...the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
> >>> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
> >>> official Stanbol release at the same time.
> >>>
> >>> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011...
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Fabian, would you take the lead of this process?
>
> Yes, I can do that since I'm also working on the IKS release.
>
> > When we where in Paris Reto mentioned also some other things. I can no
> > longer remember all the points but one was that all mvn dependencies
> > must be available on mvn central and/or the apache mvn servers.
> >
> > Maybe Reto can write (or link to) a short How-do. He is currently
> > preparing the first release of clerezza and should have a lot of
> > valuable information to share.
>
> Is Reto on this list? Otherwise I will try to contact him directly.
Present!
The requirement that all dependencies must be in central isn't apache
specific, any artifact in central must satisfy this requirement (maven
central is self-contained).
I've just started a release vote on clerezza. A first attempt, all that goes
wrong could then become part of a howto :)
Reto
>
> -- Fabian
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Fabian Christ <ch...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
2011/7/11 Rupert Westenthaler <ru...@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Fabian Christ
>> <ch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> ...the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
>>> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
>>> official Stanbol release at the same time.
>>>
>>> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011...
>
> +1
>
> Fabian, would you take the lead of this process?
Yes, I can do that since I'm also working on the IKS release.
> When we where in Paris Reto mentioned also some other things. I can no
> longer remember all the points but one was that all mvn dependencies
> must be available on mvn central and/or the apache mvn servers.
>
> Maybe Reto can write (or link to) a short How-do. He is currently
> preparing the first release of clerezza and should have a lot of
> valuable information to share.
Is Reto on this list? Otherwise I will try to contact him directly.
-- Fabian
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Rupert Westenthaler <ru...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Fabian Christ
> <ch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> ...the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
>> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
>> official Stanbol release at the same time.
>>
>> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011...
+1
Fabian, would you take the lead of this process?
>
> Note that a release from the incubator takes 72 hours as it needs a
> double vote (PPMC + Incubator PMC).
>
> I would suggest making a full release (if possible, see below) as soon
> as we're ready, and if needed re-release individual modules if there
> are significant changes later. The first release might be a lot of
> work but later ones should be much easier.
>
>>
>> I think we should use the Stanbol "stable" launcher as a reference for
>> this release. Everything included in this launcher would be part of
>> the release....
>
> We need to check our code and dependencies before deciding what can be
> released, this means at least
>
> a) Checking license headers in the stanbol code using RAT (
> http://incubator.apache.org/rat/ )
>
> b) Checking based on mvn dependency:tree that all our dependencies are
> ok according to http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>
When we where in Paris Reto mentioned also some other things. I can no
longer remember all the points but one was that all mvn dependencies
must be available on mvn central and/or the apache mvn servers.
Maybe Reto can write (or link to) a short How-do. He is currently
preparing the first release of clerezza and should have a lot of
valuable information to share.
best
Rupert
--
| Rupert Westenthaler rupert.westenthaler@gmail.com
| Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907
| A-5500 Bischofshofen
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Fabian Christ
<ch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ...the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
> official Stanbol release at the same time.
>
> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011...
Note that a release from the incubator takes 72 hours as it needs a
double vote (PPMC + Incubator PMC).
I would suggest making a full release (if possible, see below) as soon
as we're ready, and if needed re-release individual modules if there
are significant changes later. The first release might be a lot of
work but later ones should be much easier.
>
> I think we should use the Stanbol "stable" launcher as a reference for
> this release. Everything included in this launcher would be part of
> the release....
We need to check our code and dependencies before deciding what can be
released, this means at least
a) Checking license headers in the stanbol code using RAT (
http://incubator.apache.org/rat/ )
b) Checking based on mvn dependency:tree that all our dependencies are
ok according to http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html
-Bertrand
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>.
2011/7/12 Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <A....@ping.de>
> wrote:
> > I do think that components which are not yet "stable" should also be
> > included in the release if possible ("Release early - release often").
> > Minimum technical requirement: Maven must be able to build them!
> >
> > Release notes should explain the status of the components so that nobody
> > is surprised when unstable components do not work as expected.
>
> +1 for releasing early, and we can also label this first release as
> "mostly alpha quality - most everything can still change" to avoid
> unrealistic expectations.
>
+1 , I agree on marking it as an alpha.
Tommaso
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <A....@ping.de> wrote:
> I do think that components which are not yet "stable" should also be
> included in the release if possible ("Release early - release often").
> Minimum technical requirement: Maven must be able to build them!
>
> Release notes should explain the status of the components so that nobody
> is surprised when unstable components do not work as expected.
+1 for releasing early, and we can also label this first release as
"mostly alpha quality - most everything can still change" to avoid
unrealistic expectations.
-Bertrand
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Enrico Daga <en...@gmail.com>.
On 12 July 2011 07:23, Fabian Christ <ch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> yes I have no problem to release the "Full Launcher" if that's more desired.
I would prefer that way, there are modules which became stable
recently, and need to be checked, tested and especially **used** to
get them improved.
I think that the minimal requirement could be that they must be stable
(at compile time) and have a documented functionality (at runtime).
Then, if the functionality is limited to some extend, or does not work
100% as expected, the release will help developer's to find bugs or
opportunities of improvements (and motivation to do that, also)
Best
Enrico
>
> I will open JIRA issues for the release today, so that we can collect
> all the required information.
>
> Best,
> - Fabian
>
> 2011/7/12 Andreas Kuckartz <A....@ping.de>:
>> I do think that components which are not yet "stable" should also be
>> included in the release if possible ("Release early - release often").
>> Minimum technical requirement: Maven must be able to build them!
>>
>> Release notes should explain the status of the components so that nobody
>> is surprised when unstable components do not work as expected.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andreas
>>
>>
>> Am 11.07.2011 14:47, schrieb Fabian Christ:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
>>> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
>>> official Stanbol release at the same time.
>>>
>>> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011
>>>
>>> I think we should use the Stanbol "stable" launcher as a reference for
>>> this release. Everything included in this launcher would be part of
>>> the release.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Fabian
>
--
Enrico Daga
--
http://www.enridaga.net
skype: enri-pan
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Fabian Christ <ch...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
yes I have no problem to release the "Full Launcher" if that's more desired.
I will open JIRA issues for the release today, so that we can collect
all the required information.
Best,
- Fabian
2011/7/12 Andreas Kuckartz <A....@ping.de>:
> I do think that components which are not yet "stable" should also be
> included in the release if possible ("Release early - release often").
> Minimum technical requirement: Maven must be able to build them!
>
> Release notes should explain the status of the components so that nobody
> is surprised when unstable components do not work as expected.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>
>
> Am 11.07.2011 14:47, schrieb Fabian Christ:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
>> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
>> official Stanbol release at the same time.
>>
>> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011
>>
>> I think we should use the Stanbol "stable" launcher as a reference for
>> this release. Everything included in this launcher would be part of
>> the release.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Best,
>
--
Fabian
Re: [Discuss] Stanbol 0.9 Release
Posted by Andreas Kuckartz <A....@ping.de>.
I do think that components which are not yet "stable" should also be
included in the release if possible ("Release early - release often").
Minimum technical requirement: Maven must be able to build them!
Release notes should explain the status of the components so that nobody
is surprised when unstable components do not work as expected.
Cheers,
Andreas
Am 11.07.2011 14:47, schrieb Fabian Christ:
> Hi,
>
> the IKS project would like to do a release around August 22, 2011.
> Since the IKS project is based on Stanbol it would be nice to have an
> official Stanbol release at the same time.
>
> Proposal: Release Stanbol 0.9 at August 22, 2011
>
> I think we should use the Stanbol "stable" launcher as a reference for
> this release. Everything included in this launcher would be part of
> the release.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Best,