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 2011/09/29 17:21:44 UTC
A snapshot build of ARQ
Actually, two builds:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
20110929.134615-1
Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there is a
source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got class
files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in messy ARQ
setup.
20110929.145040-2
Andy
Re: A snapshot build of ARQ
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
On 29/09/11 16:21, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> Actually, two builds:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
>
>
> Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
>
> 20110929.134615-1
>
> Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there is a
> source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got class
> files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in messy ARQ
> setup.
>
> 20110929.145040-2
>
> Andy
New builds done : -3 is a plain snapshot build/deploy and -4 is a
apache-release build, from a clean checked out copy of ARQ so would be
required by a proper release.
I've also reduced from the build process the tests jar, and test-sources
jar. The assembly of a test zip went last round (use the source-release
if you want a fully testable ARQ - a lot of self-assembly was required
to use the full tests in the test zip).
Removing the test jar (not zip) isn't going to work longterm because ARQ
tests have support structures for tests, like building test suites from
SPARQL manifests. Needs a bit of thought.
The full build to upload is 27M, of which just 2.2M is the ARQ jar.
Andy
Re: A snapshot build of IRI
Posted by Paolo Castagna <ca...@googlemail.com>.
Andy Seaborne wrote:
> On 07/10/11 14:54, Paolo Castagna wrote:
>> Hi Andy,
>> I've just noticed that jena-iri is missing the required -incubating:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-iri/
>>
>> Now you have an excuse to try deleting stuff from the Apache Snapshots
>> repository yourself.
>> Or, let me know if you want me to do it.
>
> Done
Same for jena-top, it has 0-SNAPSHOT, no -incubating:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-top/0-SNAPSHOT/
I am not sure if that is necessary, but probably yes.
Paolo
>
> (I know delete works having already used it quite a lot ... it depends
> on the view of the repo and whether the repo is read-only)
>
>>
>> Paolo
>>
>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> IRI library converted to Apache copyright and new-style build (pom2.xml)
>>>
>>> ((
>>> All the separate "commits" are because SVN/Eclipse gets upset at
>>> multiple changes sometimes - e.g. move files, then edit them, then try
>>> to commit. Deleting directory trees is also a bit iffy.
>>>
>>> I have not been able to determine a consistent set of circumstances
>>> though.
>>> ))
>>>
>>> Andy
>
Re: A snapshot build of IRI
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
On 07/10/11 14:54, Paolo Castagna wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> I've just noticed that jena-iri is missing the required -incubating:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-iri/
> Now you have an excuse to try deleting stuff from the Apache Snapshots repository yourself.
> Or, let me know if you want me to do it.
Done
(I know delete works having already used it quite a lot ... it depends
on the view of the repo and whether the repo is read-only)
>
> Paolo
>
> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> IRI library converted to Apache copyright and new-style build (pom2.xml)
>>
>> ((
>> All the separate "commits" are because SVN/Eclipse gets upset at
>> multiple changes sometimes - e.g. move files, then edit them, then try
>> to commit. Deleting directory trees is also a bit iffy.
>>
>> I have not been able to determine a consistent set of circumstances though.
>> ))
>>
>> Andy
Re: A snapshot build of IRI
Posted by Paolo Castagna <ca...@googlemail.com>.
Hi Andy,
I've just noticed that jena-iri is missing the required -incubating:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-iri/
Now you have an excuse to try deleting stuff from the Apache Snapshots repository yourself.
Or, let me know if you want me to do it.
Paolo
Andy Seaborne wrote:
> IRI library converted to Apache copyright and new-style build (pom2.xml)
>
> ((
> All the separate "commits" are because SVN/Eclipse gets upset at
> multiple changes sometimes - e.g. move files, then edit them, then try
> to commit. Deleting directory trees is also a bit iffy.
>
> I have not been able to determine a consistent set of circumstances though.
> ))
>
> Andy
A snapshot build of IRI
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
IRI library converted to Apache copyright and new-style build (pom2.xml)
((
All the separate "commits" are because SVN/Eclipse gets upset at
multiple changes sometimes - e.g. move files, then edit them, then try
to commit. Deleting directory trees is also a bit iffy.
I have not been able to determine a consistent set of circumstances though.
))
Andy
Re: A snapshot build of TDB
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
On 04/10/11 20:18, Laurent Pellegrino wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> Why are you putting "incubating" in the artifact version? Is it an Apache
> rule?
Yes. Incubator podlings have -incubator in their version number to make
it clear they are not full projects yet.
Adding "jena-" to artifacts ids seems to be convention.
Adding "apache-jena-" to distribution zips is, I think, a requirement.
And it does rather all accumulate.
Andy
>
> Laurent
>
> On Tuesday, October 4, 2011, Andy Seaborne<an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-tdb
>>
>> built with jena-arq as dependency. Jena core isn't done yet.
>>
>> This is transactional TDB, which will be TDB version 0.9.0 if all goes
> well.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>
Re: A snapshot build of TDB
Posted by Laurent Pellegrino <la...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andy,
Why are you putting "incubating" in the artifact version? Is it an Apache
rule?
Laurent
On Tuesday, October 4, 2011, Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-tdb
>
> built with jena-arq as dependency. Jena core isn't done yet.
>
> This is transactional TDB, which will be TDB version 0.9.0 if all goes
well.
>
> Andy
>
A snapshot build of TDB
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-tdb
built with jena-arq as dependency. Jena core isn't done yet.
This is transactional TDB, which will be TDB version 0.9.0 if all goes well.
Andy
Re: A snapshot build of ARQ
Posted by Paolo Castagna <ca...@googlemail.com>.
Hi Andy
Andy Seaborne wrote:
> On 07/10/11 16:18, Paolo Castagna wrote:
>>
>>
>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> On 07/10/11 14:56, Paolo Castagna wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paolo Castagna wrote:
>>>>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>>>>> Actually, two builds:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 20110929.134615-1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there
>>>>>> is a
>>>>>> source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got
>>>>>> class files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in
>>>>>> messy ARQ setup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 20110929.145040-2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>
>>>>> Great!
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Andy, "keep calm and carry on"!
>>>>>
>>>>> Maven requires a lot of patience (until everything works fine).
>>>>> We are getting there, very close now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Later, I'll update LARQ accordingly. It must:
>>>>>
>>>>> - depend on the new ARQ SNAPSHOT
>>>>> - point at the Jena top parent pom.xml
>>>>
>>>> Done.
>>>>
>>>> Now LARQ depends on ARQ 2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT.
>>>> The artifact has been renamed to jena-larq.
>>>> The LARQ pom.xml file is pointing at jena-top as its parent pom.
>>>>
>>>> I also added Jena_Top top to Jenkins.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest we use just one single pom.xml file (making pom2.xml (the
>>>> new ones) the default ones).
>>>
>>> I have left the existing POMs so we can continue to get dev builds to
>>> people with them needing to risk the new Apache-organised builds which
>>> are current unchecked.
>>
>> Having people (i.e. developers) using the new SNAPSHOTs will help with
>> testing and checking for mistakes. So long we are quick at fixing
>> problems,
>> IMHO it's not a big issue having some problem in SNAPSHOTs artifacts.
>>
>> People who do not want to have risk can the latest stable release(s).
>
> You may wish to do that; I don't.
>
> I use snapshots to get fixes to people to test. I don't want to put
> barriers in the way, things that the developers is concerned with, to
> get that feedback. We ourselves have not tested the new builds (or even
> finished making the new builds).
People wanting to help with the testing of the most recent SNAPSHOTs can find them here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/jena/
Still missing (if anyone what to help!):
- Eyeball
- Fuseki
- SDB
- Jena (jena-core)
>
>>> When it's tested we can switch - and we need to sort the final copyright
>>> issues on jena-core first.
>>
>> Is there a list of still pending copyright issues?
>
> http://markmail.org/message/vpzepivbmajxbqto
Are all still open/pending?
Maybe, having JIRA issues, classified as blocker against an Apache Jena
release, and assigned to people would help in making (faster) (or tracking)
progress.
Do those stop us to publish jena-core [1] SNAPSHOTs here [2]?
Paolo
[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jena/Jena2/jena/trunk/
[2] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/jena/
>
>>
>> Sharing an up-to-date list of things which are missing would be useful,
>> so that if there is stuff which is simple/faster to get rid of or rewrite
>> others can help. (I have time next week to look at this as well as
>> creating
>> pom.xml files for the missing Jena modules).
>>
>> Paolo
>>
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paolo
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Once we have one (or two modules working) doing the rest is just
>>>>> a boring and repetitive task.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paolo
>>>
>
Re: A snapshot build of ARQ
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
On 07/10/11 16:18, Paolo Castagna wrote:
>
>
> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> On 07/10/11 14:56, Paolo Castagna wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Paolo Castagna wrote:
>>>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>>>> Actually, two builds:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
>>>>>
>>>>> 20110929.134615-1
>>>>>
>>>>> Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there is a
>>>>> source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got
>>>>> class files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in
>>>>> messy ARQ setup.
>>>>>
>>>>> 20110929.145040-2
>>>>>
>>>>> Andy
>>>>
>>>> Great!
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Andy, "keep calm and carry on"!
>>>>
>>>> Maven requires a lot of patience (until everything works fine).
>>>> We are getting there, very close now.
>>>>
>>>> Later, I'll update LARQ accordingly. It must:
>>>>
>>>> - depend on the new ARQ SNAPSHOT
>>>> - point at the Jena top parent pom.xml
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>> Now LARQ depends on ARQ 2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT.
>>> The artifact has been renamed to jena-larq.
>>> The LARQ pom.xml file is pointing at jena-top as its parent pom.
>>>
>>> I also added Jena_Top top to Jenkins.
>>>
>>> I suggest we use just one single pom.xml file (making pom2.xml (the
>>> new ones) the default ones).
>>
>> I have left the existing POMs so we can continue to get dev builds to
>> people with them needing to risk the new Apache-organised builds which
>> are current unchecked.
>
> Having people (i.e. developers) using the new SNAPSHOTs will help with
> testing and checking for mistakes. So long we are quick at fixing problems,
> IMHO it's not a big issue having some problem in SNAPSHOTs artifacts.
>
> People who do not want to have risk can the latest stable release(s).
You may wish to do that; I don't.
I use snapshots to get fixes to people to test. I don't want to put
barriers in the way, things that the developers is concerned with, to
get that feedback. We ourselves have not tested the new builds (or even
finished making the new builds).
>> When it's tested we can switch - and we need to sort the final copyright
>> issues on jena-core first.
>
> Is there a list of still pending copyright issues?
http://markmail.org/message/vpzepivbmajxbqto
>
> Sharing an up-to-date list of things which are missing would be useful,
> so that if there is stuff which is simple/faster to get rid of or rewrite
> others can help. (I have time next week to look at this as well as creating
> pom.xml files for the missing Jena modules).
>
> Paolo
>
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once we have one (or two modules working) doing the rest is just
>>>> a boring and repetitive task.
>>>>
>>>> Paolo
>>
Re: A snapshot build of ARQ
Posted by Paolo Castagna <ca...@googlemail.com>.
Andy Seaborne wrote:
> On 07/10/11 14:56, Paolo Castagna wrote:
>>
>>
>> Paolo Castagna wrote:
>>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>>> Actually, two builds:
>>>>
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
>>>>
>>>> 20110929.134615-1
>>>>
>>>> Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there is a
>>>> source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got
>>>> class files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in
>>>> messy ARQ setup.
>>>>
>>>> 20110929.145040-2
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>
>>> Great!
>>>
>>> Thanks Andy, "keep calm and carry on"!
>>>
>>> Maven requires a lot of patience (until everything works fine).
>>> We are getting there, very close now.
>>>
>>> Later, I'll update LARQ accordingly. It must:
>>>
>>> - depend on the new ARQ SNAPSHOT
>>> - point at the Jena top parent pom.xml
>>
>> Done.
>>
>> Now LARQ depends on ARQ 2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT.
>> The artifact has been renamed to jena-larq.
>> The LARQ pom.xml file is pointing at jena-top as its parent pom.
>>
>> I also added Jena_Top top to Jenkins.
>>
>> I suggest we use just one single pom.xml file (making pom2.xml (the
>> new ones) the default ones).
>
> I have left the existing POMs so we can continue to get dev builds to
> people with them needing to risk the new Apache-organised builds which
> are current unchecked.
Having people (i.e. developers) using the new SNAPSHOTs will help with
testing and checking for mistakes. So long we are quick at fixing problems,
IMHO it's not a big issue having some problem in SNAPSHOTs artifacts.
People who do not want to have risk can the latest stable release(s).
>
> When it's tested we can switch - and we need to sort the final copyright
> issues on jena-core first.
Is there a list of still pending copyright issues?
Sharing an up-to-date list of things which are missing would be useful,
so that if there is stuff which is simple/faster to get rid of or rewrite
others can help. (I have time next week to look at this as well as creating
pom.xml files for the missing Jena modules).
Paolo
>
> Andy
>
>>
>> Paolo
>>
>>>
>>> Once we have one (or two modules working) doing the rest is just
>>> a boring and repetitive task.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>
Re: A snapshot build of ARQ
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
On 07/10/11 14:56, Paolo Castagna wrote:
>
>
> Paolo Castagna wrote:
>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> Actually, two builds:
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
>>>
>>>
>>> Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
>>>
>>> 20110929.134615-1
>>>
>>> Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there is a
>>> source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got
>>> class files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in
>>> messy ARQ setup.
>>>
>>> 20110929.145040-2
>>>
>>> Andy
>>
>> Great!
>>
>> Thanks Andy, "keep calm and carry on"!
>>
>> Maven requires a lot of patience (until everything works fine).
>> We are getting there, very close now.
>>
>> Later, I'll update LARQ accordingly. It must:
>>
>> - depend on the new ARQ SNAPSHOT
>> - point at the Jena top parent pom.xml
>
> Done.
>
> Now LARQ depends on ARQ 2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT.
> The artifact has been renamed to jena-larq.
> The LARQ pom.xml file is pointing at jena-top as its parent pom.
>
> I also added Jena_Top top to Jenkins.
>
> I suggest we use just one single pom.xml file (making pom2.xml (the new ones) the default ones).
I have left the existing POMs so we can continue to get dev builds to
people with them needing to risk the new Apache-organised builds which
are current unchecked.
When it's tested we can switch - and we need to sort the final copyright
issues on jena-core first.
Andy
>
> Paolo
>
>>
>> Once we have one (or two modules working) doing the rest is just
>> a boring and repetitive task.
>>
>> Paolo
Re: A snapshot build of ARQ
Posted by Paolo Castagna <ca...@googlemail.com>.
Paolo Castagna wrote:
> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> Actually, two builds:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
>>
>>
>> Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
>>
>> 20110929.134615-1
>>
>> Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there is a
>> source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got
>> class files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in
>> messy ARQ setup.
>>
>> 20110929.145040-2
>>
>> Andy
>
> Great!
>
> Thanks Andy, "keep calm and carry on"!
>
> Maven requires a lot of patience (until everything works fine).
> We are getting there, very close now.
>
> Later, I'll update LARQ accordingly. It must:
>
> - depend on the new ARQ SNAPSHOT
> - point at the Jena top parent pom.xml
Done.
Now LARQ depends on ARQ 2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT.
The artifact has been renamed to jena-larq.
The LARQ pom.xml file is pointing at jena-top as its parent pom.
I also added Jena_Top top to Jenkins.
I suggest we use just one single pom.xml file (making pom2.xml (the new ones) the default ones).
Paolo
>
> Once we have one (or two modules working) doing the rest is just
> a boring and repetitive task.
>
> Paolo
Re: A snapshot build of ARQ
Posted by Paolo Castagna <ca...@googlemail.com>.
Andy Seaborne wrote:
> Actually, two builds:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-arq/2.8.9-incubating-SNAPSHOT/
>
>
> Build 1 a normal snapshot build.
>
> 20110929.134615-1
>
> Build 2 is a build with -Papache-release so it's signed and there is a
> source-release.zip. The latter needs tuning - currently it's got class
> files in it, but it's sideffect of the fact I produced it in messy ARQ
> setup.
>
> 20110929.145040-2
>
> Andy
Great!
Thanks Andy, "keep calm and carry on"!
Maven requires a lot of patience (until everything works fine).
We are getting there, very close now.
Later, I'll update LARQ accordingly. It must:
- depend on the new ARQ SNAPSHOT
- point at the Jena top parent pom.xml
Once we have one (or two modules working) doing the rest is just
a boring and repetitive task.
Paolo