On 11/05/11 11:27, Paolo Castagna wrote:
Hi Andy,
short answer: I am happy to release LARQ and at the same time remove the
old/legacy LARQ from ARQ.
OK
My proposal to gather some feedback from users would be to add the
new LARQ to Fuseki, as shown here: [1].
...
For LARQ, the version number has little meaning at the moment. It could
be 0.9.0 to signal that it has not been used in production (AFAIK) or it
could be 1.0.0 (since LARQ is coming from ARQ anyway and it has been
around for a while).
...
However, I'd like to try to do a release "compliant" with the
release process at Apache (should it switch license to ASL? Why not?)
so the next step then is a LARQ module release?
and before Fuseki should pick up the POM patch?
Unless the LARQ release is going to happen quite soon, I don't want to
leave Fuseki in a state for any significant period of time where a
release picks up unreleased code.
At the moment, if necessary, we can do ARQ and TDB releases -- this is
what I did for Fuseki 0.2.0 to make sure 0.2.0 picked up real versions:
fuseki-server --version ==>
Jena: VERSION: 2.6.4
Jena: BUILD_DATE: 2010-12-12T16:56:15+0000
ARQ: VERSION: 2.8.8
ARQ: BUILD_DATE: 2011-04-21T10:12:50+0100
TDB: VERSION: 0.8.10
TDB: BUILD_DATE: 2011-04-21T10:22:54+0100
Fuseki: VERSION: 0.2.0
Fuseki: BUILD_DATE: 2011-04-21T10:29:50+0100
Not a coincident that the build dates are 2011-04-21
Andy
