I have not seen this in the pull request yet, but this may work. I have also made changes to the reference position as it isn't appropriate for OSGB.
but 1169 may work as is. On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 5:17 PM Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > How is it different to > > https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/1169 > > ? (which is the Diff on the ticket, after cleaning up a bit) > > On 22/01/2022 15:58, Marco Neumann wrote: > > I have created a fix for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-2213 > > > > this involves an upgrade to SIS1.1 > > > > How are we going to include this in Jena 4.4.0? Should I ask for a pull > > request? > > > > Marco > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 3:07 PM Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Things are looking on-track for a release. > >> > >> A couple of JIRA have come in recently - one's now got a PR, and the > >> LiteralLabel looks OK, just needs trying out. > >> > >> Builds: > >> > >> Some of the Jenkins is broken (that take 2 mins ... which is a little > >> too fast!) and despite "success" the snapshot repos is unchanged. > >> There's a suspicious warning from Jenkins: INFRA-22769 and it seems to > >> only touch the top level directory. > >> > >> I have done a snapshot deploy directly (from local maven run, not > >> jenkins) with no issues. > >> > >> GH actions work ... there does seem to be one timing related issue in > >> test cleanup in jena-fuseki-webaccess when the GH actions might be under > >> load. It does not look to be related to what is being tested (deleting > >> databases). > >> > >> Andy > >> > >> On 15/01/2022 22:08, Bruno P. Kinoshita wrote: > >>> Looks good to me! > >>> > >>> Thanks Andy > >>> Bruno > >>> > >>> On Sunday, 16 January 2022, 06:53:40 am NZDT, Andy Seaborne < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> The idea was to have 4.4.0 quite soon because the Fuseki UI work > only > >>> just missing 4.3.0 > >>> > >>> Despite everything, we seem to be still on track for end-ish January! > >>> > >>> Resolved tickets for 4.4.0: > >>> https://s.apache.org/jena-4.4.0-jira > >>> > >>> Does that fit with PMC members? > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>> Contributions: > >>> > >>> Erich Bremer > >>> Update of Titanium. > >>> > >>> == Fuseki: > >>> > >>> More on Fuseki : > >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/rrvy84t79ljhpxkpccc7l70tgt9o21lk > >>> > >>> * New UI > >>> > >>> A rewritten UI using Vue. Much better easier to take forward and much > >>> easier to manage the dependencies and licensing. > >>> > >>> Thanks Bruno! > >>> > >>> * TDB2 > >>> > >>> The UI options for databases are "in-memory" and "TDB2". > >>> > >>> TDB1 is not a visible option. > >>> > >>> * Fuseki modules > >>> > >>> https://jena.apache.org/documentation/fuseki2/fuseki-modules > >>> > >>> * WAR file > >>> > >>> The WAR file will be on the project downloads page, not in the > >>> apache-jena-fuseki assembled file. This halves the size of the > zip/tar.gz > >>> > >>> It is part of evolving Fuseki in the future so the standalone server is > >>> Fuseki Main + Fuseki modules for UI and administration. > >>> > >>> The WAR file will remain while it is being used but it's incompatible > >>> with drop-in Fuseki-module extensions. > >>> > >>> * Tomcat 10 > >>> > >>> The WAR file is not compatible with Tomcat 10 which is using "jakarta" > >>> APIs, not "javax" APIs. > >>> > >>> There is a conversion tool > >>> https://tomcat.apache.org/download-migration.cgi > >>> is someone would like to try it out. > >>> > >>> ** HTML file upload. > >>> > >>> The HTML file upload functionality, "serviceUpload", is no longer > >>> included in new default configurations. > >>> > >>> This is not GSP. GSP does support multifile uploads. > >>> > >>> == Assembler for GeoSPARQL > >>> > >>> This makes it easier to use GeoPSARQL in a plain Fuseki. > >>> > >>> == xloader > >>> > >>> TDB2 xloader has usability improvements based on our wikidata testing > by > >>> Øyvind, Lorenz and Marco, including full wikiData (16.7B triples) as > >>> well as "truthy" (6.6B triples). > >>> > >>> In particular, it now has "--threads=" -- Lorenz reported goo > >>> improvements (if the server has the hardware!). > >>> > >>> > >>> TDB1 xloader is still the old tdbloader2 with some of the earlier > >>> improvements of TDB2 xloader. > >>> > >>> For me, TDB2 is the preferred database. > >>> TDB1 exists because it is out there; it may get back ports, it may not. > >>> > >>> == Other: > >>> > >>> Dependencies up to date: log4j 2.17.1; Update to Titanium 1.2.0 > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > -- --- Marco Neumann KONA
