Re: [rdf4j-dev] planning ahead: 3.7 vs 4.0

["Bart Hanssens (BOSA)" <bart.hanssens@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

 

 

Not as actively working on RDF4J as I’d like to be :-/

 

One of the things that I was looking into is a rewrite of the Console, based on picocli and a (much) more recent jline.

This would provide (more or less) i18n for free, and make it much easier to add some nice features

(color, maybe SPARQL syntax highlighting, filename completion).

 

Plus it would be a good opportunity to remove logback from the console, and perhaps rename some of the commands / parameters.

Not sure if that counts as “useful” though.

 

 

Best regards

 

Bart

 

From: rdf4j-dev <rdf4j-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Håvard Ottestad
Sent: donderdag 11 februari 2021 14:39
To: rdf4j developer discussions <rdf4j-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [rdf4j-dev] planning ahead: 3.7 vs 4.0

 

Hi Jeen,

 

Performance improvements for BindingSet. We’ve seen a 2x improvement during early testing. So that would be a great reason for users to upgrade. 

 

I’m with you on the SHACL validation of remote endpoints. That would be great to have. Also 100% SHACL compliance. 

 

Rewrite of the Sail structures to support inferred triples all the way down so we can finally fix that transaction isolation issue that’s been hanging around for forever. 

Håvard

On 11 Feb 2021, at 01:53, Jeen Broekstra <jeen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Hi folks,

 

Looking ahead after the 3.6 release, we have a decision to make: do we want to focus on getting a new major release out the door, or do we want to continue the 3.x series for a while longer?

 

The main justification for a major release are that we can do breaking changes: remove deprecated code, major refactors, or even deciding to bump our minimally-supported Java version (I must admit I'd _really_ like to bump to Java 11, but I understand the hesitation from some of our vendor partners).

Typically, to make the pain of upgrading for a major version easier to swallow for our users, we would accompany that with some massively useful improvements and new features as well.

 

So the question is: do we have enough material to justify making the next release a major one? 

 

Here's what's currently planned for the 4.0.0 milestone:

 

https://github.com/eclipse/rdf4j/milestone/30

 

Almost all of this is purely "housekeeping": removing obsolete code etc. Important, but not really particularly exciting to users. Perhaps the most interesting thing is the task to make each package contained in only a single module (to allow for use as part of a Java 9 modular architecture). 

 

We have a substantial backlog of feature requests and bugs. On my radar as big/important new features for 2021 are the use of SHACL validation against a (remote) repository / SPARQL endpoint, and further upgrades and extensions of our RDF* support. I'm also thinking that planning this for a major release at the outset gives us some freedom: we don't have to jump through so many hoops to make sure everything remains backward compatible (though of course even with a major release, if we can keep it compatible, we probably should).

 

Where do you stand on this? What are your big 2021 must-haves for RDF4J (if any)?

 

As an aside: regardless of whether the next release after 3.6 is a major or a minor, we will need to go through a release review for this one, as it's been a year since the last review. 

 

Jeen

_______________________________________________
rdf4j-dev mailing list
rdf4j-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rdf4j-dev