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...@epimorphics.com> on 2012/01/12 10:20:17 UTC
Fuseki repackage
I changed the package structure for Fuseki to be org.apache.jena.fuseki.
No one uses it as a library (except me) so the change should be
transparent - the server jar executes from the built-in main class set
via the POM.
Andy
Re: Fuseki repackage
Posted by Chris Dollin <ch...@epimorphics.com>.
Robert said:
> Even if we were using 0.2.1 I think we would prefer not to use assembler descriptions
> as that would allow users to break things by changing the file. Also we configure
> differently depending on the command line arguments our code received and
> I don't know that assembler would allow us to cope with that nicely
> (though I think we can call arbitrary code?)
Depending on the details of who runs the assembler and how much control
you have over where they get the config from, one trick (which Eyeball
uses) is to have the command-line args edit the config before assembly.
Chris
--
"It does not need to take events in their correct order." /Hexwood/
Epimorphics Ltd, http://www.epimorphics.com
Registered address: Court Lodge, 105 High Street, Portishead, Bristol BS20 6PT
Epimorphics Ltd. is a limited company registered in England (number 7016688)
Re: Fuseki repackage
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
On 12/01/12 20:13, Robert Vesse wrote:
> We actually reference it as a library (via maven) and call
> Fuseki.init() in our startup code to actually start up Fuseki.
>
> We then have our own init() routine which registers all the relevant
> query engines and does other setup - custom describe handler,
> optimization config etc
>
> Even if we were using 0.2.1 I think we would prefer not to use
> assembler descriptions as that would allow users to break things by
> changing the file. Also we configure differently depending on the
> command line arguments our code received and I don't know that
> assembler would allow us to cope with that nicely (though I think we
> can call arbitrary code?)
>
> Rob
Rob,
Thanks for the background. The way a server is created programmatically
has changed but not so as to block what you're doing. Essentially, the
configuration file is parsed to a set of dataset descriptions and the
set of descriptors is passed to server creation. There's no reason code
couldn't create such a descriptor. Learning from Joseki, I'm aiming for:
configuration -> java data objects -> build server
The data objects are structs - simply recording the configuration - and
can be built by code as well.
Andy
Re: Fuseki repackage
Posted by Robert Vesse <rv...@cray.com>.
We actually reference it as a library (via maven) and call Fuseki.init() in our startup code to actually start up Fuseki.
We then have our own init() routine which registers all the relevant query engines and does other setup - custom describe handler, optimization config etc
Even if we were using 0.2.1 I think we would prefer not to use assembler descriptions as that would allow users to break things by changing the file. Also we configure differently depending on the command line arguments our code received and I don't know that assembler would allow us to cope with that nicely (though I think we can call arbitrary code?)
Rob
On Jan 12, 2012, at 11:48 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> On 12/01/12 17:31, Robert Vesse wrote:
>> We use it as a library quite heavily!
>
> Oops - I didn't know anyone even could do that! Sorry.
>
> How do you use it? Are you using the servlets and your own configuration setting?
>
> 0.2.1 introduces a config file where you can put assembler descriptions.
>
> Andy
>
>
>>
>> We're still using pre-Apache Fuseki 0.2.0 for the time being so this shouldn't affect us just yet.
>>
>> Rob
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Andy Seaborne [andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com]
>> Sent: 12 January 2012 01:20
>> To: jena-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Fuseki repackage
>>
>> I changed the package structure for Fuseki to be org.apache.jena.fuseki.
>> No one uses it as a library (except me) so the change should be
>> transparent - the server jar executes from the built-in main class set
>> via the POM.
>>
>> Andy
>
Re: Fuseki repackage
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
On 12/01/12 17:31, Robert Vesse wrote:
> We use it as a library quite heavily!
Oops - I didn't know anyone even could do that! Sorry.
How do you use it? Are you using the servlets and your own
configuration setting?
0.2.1 introduces a config file where you can put assembler descriptions.
Andy
>
> We're still using pre-Apache Fuseki 0.2.0 for the time being so this shouldn't affect us just yet.
>
> Rob
> ________________________________________
> From: Andy Seaborne [andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com]
> Sent: 12 January 2012 01:20
> To: jena-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Fuseki repackage
>
> I changed the package structure for Fuseki to be org.apache.jena.fuseki.
> No one uses it as a library (except me) so the change should be
> transparent - the server jar executes from the built-in main class set
> via the POM.
>
> Andy
RE: Fuseki repackage
Posted by Robert Vesse <rv...@cray.com>.
We use it as a library quite heavily!
We're still using pre-Apache Fuseki 0.2.0 for the time being so this shouldn't affect us just yet.
Rob
________________________________________
From: Andy Seaborne [andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com]
Sent: 12 January 2012 01:20
To: jena-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Fuseki repackage
I changed the package structure for Fuseki to be org.apache.jena.fuseki.
No one uses it as a library (except me) so the change should be
transparent - the server jar executes from the built-in main class set
via the POM.
Andy