You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jena.apache.org by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org> on 2012/09/30 19:10:38 UTC
SDB release possibilities
We have a reasonable number of reports of SDB including used with MS SQL
Server, MySQL, PostgresQL and Oracle SQL 11g.
It tests with HSQLDB and I've now added Derby (latest version) to the
build setup and so that's in the standard build/test now.
There has been one issue reported - on windows, it's possible to get
parse warnings from the config file because the file base name isn't
converted to a safe form when there is a drive letter. It's a warning,
not an error. This will go away eventually.
Choices:
1/ release SDB 1.3.5 with a dependency on Jena 2.7.3
2/ release Jena 2.7.4, and update SDB 1.3.5 then release SDB 1.3.5
(there are internal changes that affect SDB 1.3.5 and make it
incompatible with Jena 2.7.4)
PMC review of SDB needs to cover the basics of legal and process
requirements. The community has done testing of codebase.
My concern with choice-2 is the amount of testing work it generates all
at the same time. I'm happy to be Release Manager for both.
Thoughts?
Andy
Re: SDB release possibilities
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
Ok. Looking at the cleaning ideally needed for 2.7.4, I don't see it as
being a good idea to link them anymore.
A "quick" follow on release sounds like a good idea. Syncing with Fuseki
(see users@ email) is always going to be an issue if SDB releasesare
off-cycle.
Andy
On Friday, 5 October 2012, Damian Steer <d....@bristol.ac.uk> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 30/09/12 18:10, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> We have a reasonable number of reports of SDB including used with
>> MS SQL Server, MySQL, PostgresQL and Oracle SQL 11g.
>>
>> It tests with HSQLDB and I've now added Derby (latest version) to
>> the build setup and so that's in the standard build/test now.
>>
>> There has been one issue reported - on windows, it's possible to
>> get parse warnings from the config file because the file base name
>> isn't converted to a safe form when there is a drive letter. It's
>> a warning, not an error. This will go away eventually.
>>
>> Choices:
>>
>> 1/ release SDB 1.3.5 with a dependency on Jena 2.7.3
>>
>> 2/ release Jena 2.7.4, and update SDB 1.3.5 then release SDB 1.3.5
>>
>> (there are internal changes that affect SDB 1.3.5 and make it
>> incompatible with Jena 2.7.4)
>
> Mild preference for 1 given that we've had sufficient feedback on that
> particular configuration, and a sooner-rather-than-later basis.
>
> Ideally crank the handle fairly quickly post-2.7.4 release?
>
> Damian
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlBuvfUACgkQAyLCB+mTtykFjQCfexAtcdHGQGpRwgqa4casFS4x
> FVoAniOJ1Zrg4MHnwRX2aAp95pRIpgQV
> =Wpoz
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
Re: SDB release possibilities
Posted by Damian Steer <d....@bristol.ac.uk>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 30/09/12 18:10, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> We have a reasonable number of reports of SDB including used with
> MS SQL Server, MySQL, PostgresQL and Oracle SQL 11g.
>
> It tests with HSQLDB and I've now added Derby (latest version) to
> the build setup and so that's in the standard build/test now.
>
> There has been one issue reported - on windows, it's possible to
> get parse warnings from the config file because the file base name
> isn't converted to a safe form when there is a drive letter. It's
> a warning, not an error. This will go away eventually.
>
> Choices:
>
> 1/ release SDB 1.3.5 with a dependency on Jena 2.7.3
>
> 2/ release Jena 2.7.4, and update SDB 1.3.5 then release SDB 1.3.5
>
> (there are internal changes that affect SDB 1.3.5 and make it
> incompatible with Jena 2.7.4)
Mild preference for 1 given that we've had sufficient feedback on that
particular configuration, and a sooner-rather-than-later basis.
Ideally crank the handle fairly quickly post-2.7.4 release?
Damian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlBuvfUACgkQAyLCB+mTtykFjQCfexAtcdHGQGpRwgqa4casFS4x
FVoAniOJ1Zrg4MHnwRX2aAp95pRIpgQV
=Wpoz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----