You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@stanbol.apache.org by Rupert Westenthaler <rw...@apache.org> on 2011/01/14 13:26:48 UTC
Re: Proposal: Steps for the code conversion to org.apache.stanbol
Hi all,
With revision r1058959 I consider Step 1 and 2 as completed for RICK.
So if nobody
objects I would like to start with Step 3 next week.
This work will include:
- rename everything from "eu.iksproject" to "org.apache.stanbol"
- rename the root package "rick" to "entityHub"
- rename the interface "Rick" to "EntityHub" and "RickConfiguration" to
"EntityHubConfiguration" (same for the implementation)
This should not have any major influence to other components. Only the
RICK based
Enhancement Engine and the FISE full launcher configuration will need
some adaptions.
After completing (and committing) this Step I plan to immediately
start with Step 4.
While doing that I would also like to move and update the
documentation available
at [1] to Stanbol.
Related to that I have the question if we have already a wiki for Stanbol and
if not what steps are required to get one?
I was only able to find a single sentence in a protocol from October that
we can ask for a wiki and that it usually will take about 10 days
before it is available.
best
Rupert Westenthaler
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Olivier Grisel
<ol...@ensta.org> wrote:
> 2010/12/15 Rupert Westenthaler <rw...@apache.org>:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to make an proposal how to process with the conversion
>> from eu.iksprojet to org.apache.stanbol. The goal of this proposal is
>> to keep the unique steps as simple as possible and to allow it to more
>> easily track the changes.
>>
>> Step 1: Agree on the code conventions and give everybody a change to
>> commit local changes
>> Step 2: Apply the code conventions to the current source
>> Step 3: Change packages from eu.iksproject to org.apache.stanbol and
>> adapt POM files so that stanbol builds with the new package names. I
>> would not rename sub packages like rick -> entityhub within that step.
>> Step 4: Apply all the changes within the source and configuration
>> files. e.g. Changing constants, literals, log messages, namespaces of
>> ontologies, metatype.properties ... but no other code changes.
>> Step 5: other stuff and further development
>> - common RESTful and web bundle
>> - refactoring and renaming of sub packages
>> - extensions to the enhancement structure (when we change the
>> namespaces, it is the best time to also change the ontology, because
>> than we break existing clients only once)
>> - ...
>>
--
| Rupert Westenthaler rwesten@apache.org
| Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907
| A-5500 Bischofshofen
Re: Proposal: Steps for the code conversion to org.apache.stanbol
Posted by Olivier Grisel <ol...@ensta.org>.
2011/1/14 Rupert Westenthaler <rw...@apache.org>:
> Hi all,
>
> With revision r1058959 I consider Step 1 and 2 as completed for RICK.
> So if nobody
> objects I would like to start with Step 3 next week.
>
> This work will include:
> - rename everything from "eu.iksproject" to "org.apache.stanbol"
> - rename the root package "rick" to "entityHub"
> - rename the interface "Rick" to "EntityHub" and "RickConfiguration" to
> "EntityHubConfiguration" (same for the implementation)
I would rather not have mixed case in package names: hence entityhub
than entityHub
Otherwise +1
--
Olivier
http://twitter.com/ogrisel - http://github.com/ogrisel
Re: Proposal: Steps for the code conversion to org.apache.stanbol
Posted by Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>.
Hi Rupert
2011/1/14 Rupert Westenthaler <rw...@apache.org>
> Hi all,
>
> With revision r1058959 I consider Step 1 and 2 as completed for RICK.
> So if nobody
> objects I would like to start with Step 3 next week.
>
> This work will include:
> - rename everything from "eu.iksproject" to "org.apache.stanbol"
> - rename the root package "rick" to "entityHub"
> - rename the interface "Rick" to "EntityHub" and "RickConfiguration" to
> "EntityHubConfiguration" (same for the implementation)
>
> This should not have any major influence to other components. Only the
> RICK based
> Enhancement Engine and the FISE full launcher configuration will need
> some adaptions.
>
it sounds like a good plan.
Only a side note on the latest commit, let's remember to keep svn commits
bound to the related Jira issue (i.e. use "[STANBOL-NN] - blabla" as svn
log message when committing) so that everyone can understand what's being
committed just from the log and track changes from Jira;-)
2011/1/14 Olivier Grisel <ol...@ensta.org>
>
> I would rather not have mixed case in package names: hence entityhub
> than entityHub
+1 here as well
Cheers,
Tommaso