Github user afs commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/95#issuecomment-161933794
Looks good - the updated pull request can be applied (note to all and
sundry : this is one of those PRs that the .diff works but the .patch does not
... I suspect any PR that
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-624?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15041303#comment-15041303
]
Andy Seaborne commented on JENA-624:
Yes - not disagreeing with that. My point is whether every use of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-624?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15041675#comment-15041675
]
A. Soroka commented on JENA-624:
Unless {{TupleTable}} is available for use, no one will ever try to use it,
Hm, okay. But looking at `GraphView`, it is understandably not exposing any
means to get at the `DatasetGraph` that supports it. I assume that we do _not_
want to change that. Would we install transaction control methods in
`GraphView`, so that `ModelCom` could use them to respect transactions
GitHub user ajs6f opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/104
Using ThreadLocal::remove to clean thread-specific state
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/ajs6f/jena RemoveThreadLocals
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-624?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15041681#comment-15041681
]
A. Soroka edited comment on JENA-624 at 12/4/15 5:02 PM:
-
[~andy.seaborne], now that
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-624?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15041681#comment-15041681
]
A. Soroka edited comment on JENA-624 at 12/4/15 5:02 PM:
-
[~andy.seaborne], now that
