W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-ruby@w3.org > May 2012

Re: New github organization: ruby-rdf

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 13:32:24 -0400
To: Gabriel Horner <gabriel.horner@gmail.com>
CC: "public-rdf-ruby@w3.org" <public-rdf-ruby@w3.org>, Arto Bendiken <arto.bendiken@gmail.com>, Ben Lavender <blavender@gmail.com>, Nicholas Humfrey <nicholas.humfrey@bbc.co.uk>
Message-ID: <846DDD9C-AD0B-455F-A91E-78E0B9149922@greggkellogg.net>
On May 15, 2012, at 5:46 AM, Gabriel Horner wrote:

> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:
>> I just set up ruby-rdf as an organization on GitHub at http://github.com/ruby-rdf. I've also transferred most of the RDF gems for which I was the owner to this org. This includes the following:
>> 
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-rdfxml
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-rdfa
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-turtle
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-trig
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-microdata
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-n3
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-xsd
>> https://github.com/ruby-rdf/sparql
>> 
>> (others will go there when they're more stable).
> 
> For all the gems that you have push access, you could just fork over
> to ruby-rdf. That way you're still giving credit to the original
> owner. You could explain in the README that the repository has moved
> over to the organization. It would help if datagraph, bendinken and
> bhuga updated their repository descriptions to point to ruby-rdf as
> the canonical ones.

Yes, in the absence of action by Arto and Ben, my plan is to move my own repos over, and then fork those back to my own account. Of course, this means a fork of a fork, so it would be better to have the original root repos moved.

Alternatively, my repos, which are the most up-to-date at least for rdf and rdf-spec, could break the fork and become primary repos, which is probably less confusing.

Best would be for Arto and Ben to take action.

>> 
>> I encourage owners of other RDF repos to join the organization and move their repos over as well.
>> 
>> Next step will be to re-release these gems with updated gemspec information so that the home pages show up properly on http://rubygems.org.
>> 
>> Also, I'll look into creating GitHub Pages for the generated Yard documentation. This should replace the Ruby Forge docs, which are way out of date.
> 
> You could just use http://rdoc.info/gems/GEM i.e.
> http://rdoc.info/gems/rdf . The site is maintained by the Yard author.

The READMEs already reference http://rubydoc.info/gems/GEM (which is the same thing, really). However, I think that http://ruby-rdf.gitub.com and sub-URLs should probably at least contain the READMEs themselves. For http://ruby-rdf.github.com, the linkeddata README might be most comprehensive.

With rubydoc.info, it definitely favors the root repository, for example http:;rdoc.info/gems/linkeddata reference's datagraph's gem, while my own requires more detail: http://rdoc.info/github/gkellogg/linkeddata/frames

Gregg

>> 
>> Gregg
>> 
>> 
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 17:33:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 15 May 2012 17:33:46 GMT