any particular reason why you add the 0 at the end?

Jena 3.11 would be sufficient

I have seen it in previous releases as well but there is no need to do
so. is there a build tool that requires this?

Marco

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 5:45 PM Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> OK - I'll prepare Jena 3.11.0.
>
> Given the national holidays around this time, be better to have the vote
> run into next week.
>
>      Andy
>
> On 17/04/2019 21:29, Aaron Coburn wrote:
> > Also +1 to releasing 3.11 soon and addressing these other issues in 3.12.
> > (But either way is fine with me)
> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 6:47 AM <aj...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 to releasing 3.11.0 as described and not loading it up any further.
> >>
> >> ajs6f
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, 6:14 AM Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> We seem to be trying to do too much in one release.  As ever, people get
> >>> busy.
> >>>
> >>> https://s.apache.org/jena-3.11.0-jira
> >>>     36 JIRA
> >>>
> >>> including fixes like JENA-1657 "Close response stream of http
> >> connections".
> >>>
> >>> While not a major problem at the moment, it can start to cause blockage
> >>> for other work.
> >>>
> >>> We could release 3.11.0 ASAP (it's 4 months since 3.10.0) and
> >>> immediately start on 3.12.0. I can RM 3.11.0 and have some time to help
> >>> with a 3.12 ... hoping to get it all done during May.
> >>>
> >>> Or we could just accept a delay to 3.11.0.
> >>>
> >>> It is the usual tension between perfect and timely with volunteer time!
> >>>
> >>> While my preference is release 3.11.0 now and start 3.12.0, either is OK
> >>> for me.
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>>       Andy
> >>>
> >>> On 03/04/2019 21:16, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >>>> We have three major streams outstanding.
> >>>> Have I missed anything?
> >>>>
> >>>> 1/ GeoSPARQL
> >>>> 2/ Prometheus metrics
> >>>> 3/ SurroundQueryParser
> >>>>
> >>>> == GeoSPARQL
> >>>>
> >>>> Greg - apologies for being tardy on this one. It looks in good shape.
> >>>> Did you hear from anyone after the request for feedback?
> >>>>
> >>>> This is two modules: geosparql-jena and geosparql-fuseki
> >>>>
> >>>> A suggestion for how to proceed if you have the time for 3.11.0 is that
> >>>> we include these basically as-is and remove jena-spatial from Fuseki
> >>>> which we have been signalling for a while.
> >>>>
> >>>> Suggestion:
> >>>>
> >>>>     jena-geosparql
> >>>>     jena-fuseki/jena-fuseki-geospatial
> >>>>
> >>>> and under org.apache.jena.geosparql and
> >> org.apache.jena.fuseki.geosparql
> >>>>
> >>>> It would have to be maven.
> >>>>
> >>>> Documentation:
> >>>> This does not have to timed with the release though desirable to have
> >>>> some instructions on the website.
> >>>>
> >>>> Looking the modules, it has its own specialised Fuseki incarnation with
> >>>> command line arguments and also internally a system wide configuration.
> >>>> maybe, later, we might want to merge the Fuseki setup but exactly how
> >>>> and whether separate is better for users due to the specialised nature
> >>>> can wait. Release should get feedback after it is incorporated -
> >>>> "release early, release often".
> >>>>
> >>>> Greg - how does that sound?
> >>>>
> >>>> PMC - having more eyes on this would be helpful.
> >>>>
> >>>> If the timing is OK, we can work on details on the ticket JENA-664 (or
> >>>> email on dev@).
> >>>>
> >>>> == JENA-1691 : Prometheus metrics
> >>>>
> >>>> This is getting there. We have the code worked out, the packaging needs
> >>>> a bit of discussion; importantly it is missing L&N changes due to
> >>>> BSD-binaries in the combined jars mean some L&N changes.
> >>>>
> >>>> == JENA-1690 : SurroundQueryParser
> >>>>
> >>>> Looks like this is ready and waiting for someone to merge it.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> With all that, it looks like some things to sort out.
> >>>>
> >>>> We can wait a bit longer for 3.11.0, or do 3.11.0 fairly soon with
> >>>> whatever is ready, including getting things in and expect to further
> >>>> refine, then advance the timing on 3.12.0.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>>       Andy
> >>>
> >>
> >



-- 


---
Marco Neumann
KONA

Reply via email to