On 07/10/14 17:37, Bruno P. Kinoshita wrote:
My vote is not binding, but I'd be +1 for that. I'm using
ParameterizedSparqlString from ARQ to create simple INSERT's that will go to a
Fuseki SPARQL endpoint, but my guess is that QueryBuilder would ease the other
users to understand how the query was being built (pun intended :)
So you'll probably already have 1 user to annoy you with bug and feature
requests in the future.
CheersBruno
From: Claude Warren <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2014 1:15 PM
Subject: Query Builder
Does anyone have an objection to adding the query builder code to the jena
project?
Does anyone have a suggestion for where to put it?
I assume we don't want it in ARQ (though the code is currently ARQ package
based).
It seems to me that it is a nice to have utility and should be packaged
with other nice to have utilities or perhaps on it's own.
Do we need to have a discussion and come to consensus about how to package
other similar packages?
Claude
Is this good timing for your idea of jena-commons [*]?
There are 3 choices:
1/ In an existing module
2/ In "jena-commons"
3/ In its own module
I think it's time we did less of (1); I'm fairly neutral on (2) or (3).
If part of a future commons becomes too large, too popular (!), or
whatever, we can move it to it's own module. Going into "commons" does
not fix it to commons for all time.
An area of the website could be the commons page with links to subpages
about each component.
The other thought I had was whether this is "labs" to label is as new
and making it clearer for changes that might not be perfectly compatible.
Andy
[*]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jena-dev/201406.mbox/%3CCAOQrJk6qSX%2BKX3B7EFnd_qG6juqYWBUsbbUC5UaAyKwdxnDkeA%40mail.gmail.com%3E
