Hi. "Iain R. Learmonth" <i...@fsfe.org> writes:
> Hi Oliver, > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:23:46AM +0200, Olivier Berger wrote: >> Thanks for your interest and noticing the need for a port of that >> feature. > > I've started looking at this. > Great :-) >> FYI, I had started some work on this (see https://trello.com/c/4v0AlQse >> ) but haven't had the time to move on and won't probably have in the >> coming months. > > My goal is essentially to port the existing functionality from the > packages.qa.debian.org to tracker.debian.org, but in a way that it could be > extended later. > :-) > I plan to use python-rdflib quite extensively in this. > > I'll admit I don't share your views on linkage with upstream/downstream, but > that doesn't mean I won't consider these during the implementation. In the case that would help, please note that I've re-published a "richer" version of our paper that describes the work, as : http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/papier-oss2013/ You'll see that it embeds some Linked Data too, reusing the Linked Research approach [2] (and check the JS menu for better output). Btw, the ADMS.SW format has seen some later revisions in the form of Application Profiles of ADMS. For instance, the Joinup platform now expects things more in-line with the rest of the ADMS specs [1], which has led me to work on a light adaptation of the ADMS.SW output of FusionForge (which is deployed on Alioth.debian.org) [0]. The latest version has been deployed for tests on https://adullact.net/plugins/admssw/index.php if you're curious. The differences aren't big, but some choices are probably better. But for a start, porting in an "exact" way may be the safer bet, until some consumer complains about the lack of certain details. > My main motivation is to have some easily parseable outputs in a known > format for tools to look at Debian package metadata. I plan to have > outputs in RDF/XML, Turtle and JSON-LD. I think the order of priority could be Turtle, the JSON-LD and finally RDF/XML if need be, nowadays. But we lack statistics on the popularity. > >> Anyone interested can still probe me for advice if needed. > > If you're not currently looking at this, I can just get going, and I'll > probe you when I get stuck. > That sounds like a perfect way to go : I'm quite busy at the moment (recent parent of twins ;), so I can't dedicate much effort on that for the coming months, but I'm glad to help. > Thanks for your work on packages.qa.debian.org, I hope my work can live up > to the same standards for tracker.debian.org. > Thank you very much, and good luck. Best regards, [0] https://fusionforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=755&group_id=6&atid=114 [1] https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/adms/asset_release/adms-application-profile-joinup [2] https://github.com/csarven/linked-research -- Olivier BERGER http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 2048R/5819D7E8 Ingenieur Recherche - Dept INF Institut Mines-Telecom, Telecom SudParis, Evry (France) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87fv8cwh2y....@inf-11879.int-evry.fr
