On 7/21/14, 8:33 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > 2014-07-21 16:55 GMT+02:00 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: > >> 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. >> > Phil, thanks for clearing this up. > > I think after sorting the IP stuff out, the guys don't need sandbox karma > (in svn), but a sandbox git repo (since they insist on developing via git)
OK, that will require an Infra ticket, I guess. Phil > > Benedikt > > >> Welcome to Commons! >> >> Phil >> >> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/commons/CommonsEtiquette >> [2] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ >> >> >>>> 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: >>> >>> https://github.com/wikier/commons-rdf/issues/9 >>> >>> 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 ;-) >>> >>> https://github.com/wikier/commons-rdf/issues/28 >>> >>> Thanks for all your comments. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
