community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hervé BOUTEMY <>
Subject Re: Format for project data: DOAP/JSON/other (was: Is ready for prime time?)
Date Sun, 21 Jun 2015 23:50:22 GMT
from my experience when working on the topic, what was very confusing was PMC 
descriptors vs projects DOAP files, and the fact that everything was mixed in 
code [1]

Then I just copied content in projects-new data directory and renamed things 
to be clear about these 2 types of descriptors [2]: IMHO, this will already 
help a lot

Another thing I did is that Python scripts that parse descriptors (projects 
and committees) to generate json files also copy .rdf files in 
/doap/{committeeId} [3]

Last thing at the moment: once again, I'm not a DOAP expert, and there seem to 
be semantic web experts in ASF who should help others better understand how to 
use that. But at the moment, the format seems really not well understood by a 
vast majority of people, even if some advanced rdf files [4] show what can be 







Le dimanche 21 juin 2015 16:29:19 sebb a écrit :
> [Starting thread with new subject]
> On 21 June 2015 at 16:03, Hervé BOUTEMY <> wrote:
> > Le dimanche 21 juin 2015 15:54:29 jan i a écrit :
> >> On 21 June 2015 at 15:48, Daniel Gruno <> wrote:
> >> > I think the site is ready for a more prominent role, but I find this
> >> > discussion confusing, and I find it somewhat sad that we're gonna stick
> >> > with something as arcane as DOAP.
> >> 
> >> +100 !!
> >> 
> >> DOAP == Dead On Arrival Permanently :-) JSON == Jump Simply On New
> >> (but I know I am only 1 voice).
> > 
> > step by step, please: this will avoid confusion between independant topics
> > 
> > switching without disturbing current conventions/knowledge is something
> > that already takes a long time and energy: I know it because I put a lot
> > of energy on it for a few monthes now!
> > 
> > We started a discussion on this source format topic during april, and
> > nobody worked on it.
> > 
> > What I'd like now is to switch: we can discuss later on what we want to
> > change (and communication to every comittees this requires).
> > With the new site, we'll be able to change formats if we want, the only
> > requirement is to have json files for the visualization
> Some PMCs are very responsive to requests to maintain DOAP files;
> others take months and multiple reminders even for a simple fix. This
> does not directly affect the format used to hold the data. However it
> does mean that changing to a new format is likely to take a lot of
> time and involve a lot of work. Meanwhile the code will need to
> continue to support the old format.
> It would however be an opportunity to make some improvements. For example:
> - we could be more specific about the data that really needs to be
> maintained by PMCs
> - we could require that the files are stored in a well-known place,
> rather than requiring an index file to find them.

View raw message