commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Steitz <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] commons-rdf
Date Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:55:51 GMT
On 7/21/14, 5:11 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote:
> Hi Benedikt,
> On 21/07/14 13:12, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>> first of all, welcome the Apache Commons dev mailing list. It's
>> nice to
>> hear that you have decided to share code with others using the
>> Apache
>> Commons project.
> Consider this contribution our (Andy, Peter and mine) two cents to
> such important project. Thanks for having us on board.
>> In the past we had the policy, that the commons sandbox is free
>> for all ASF
>> committers. So you could have started coding at commons right
>> from the
>> beginning ;-)
>> Since you already bringing a group of people who are willing to
>> work on the
>> component, I don't have a problem with letting commons-rdf join
>> the sandbox.
> Sorry, I tried to find it, but in the web site there is no
> information about such procedure. Do we need to start a vote and
> get a consensus from the Commons PMC?

There is no formal process for starting a sandbox component per se,
as long as existing ASF committer(s) are initiating it.  To get
sandbox karma, ASF committers just have to ask for it here.  There
is, however, a process for accepting a software grant, which in this
case we are going to have to follow, since the initial code was
developed outside the ASF (i.e., not under the oversight of an ASF
PMC, unless I am misunderstanding something).   Have a look at [1]
for how Commons sandbox works and [2] for the IP clearance process.

Welcome to Commons!



>> Using git may be an issue. We had long discussions about svn vs.
>> git and we
>> came to the conclusion that using the one or the other should be
>> decided on
>> a component basis by the developers of the components. So far
>> only Commons
>> Math is really taking action to migrate to git.
>> If you really want to use git, we need to figure out how we can
>> integrate
>> that with our release process. Having you join us, may be a
>> chance for us
>> to learn from more experienced git users ;-)
> Definitely we do need git, otherwise some tasks would require
> extra time to fuss with the weird way that svn does things after
> working with git.
> I'm not aware of the long discussions you mention. But of course
> I'm willing to help you guys with the migration of those
> subprojects that want to try.
>> I'm not sure about the git PRs. Does that involve github? What
>> about the IP
>> in such a case? It legal okay with that?
> Infra has already worked on providing the basic infrastructure.
> Then each project is free to manage it as they prefer. What we did
> in Marmotta, for instance, is to force to file issues in Jira for
> all PRs (so having the regular IP in place).
>> About the commons-rdf code itself: I only took a very brief look.
>> As far as
>> I understand this is only supposed to be an API, hence there are no
>> implementation classes, right? One thing that caught my eye is
>> BlankNoreOrIRI... Is this defined as such in the standard?
> You are completely right. There has been a long discussion about
> that aspect, see issue #9 fir further background:
> Because there is not such official term for what a RDF subject
> could have a triple.
>> It just feels wrong, and I'm seeing people doing:
>> if(term instanceof BlankNode)
>>    BlankNode node = (BlankNode) term
>> else
>>    IRI iri = (IRI) term
> It is not expected to have classes implementing only that
> interface, so it's only useful for the methods signature. That's
> indeed a problem in Java, so we may have to figure out better
> design solutions.
>> But as I said, I only too a very brief look and I don't know RDF
>> too well.
>> Further more, where are the license headers in your files?!
> Already working on it ;-)
> Thanks for all your comments.
> Cheers,

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message