Skip to content

(UCO Issue 373) Upgrade rdf-toolkit and Java#90

Merged
plbt5 merged 2 commits intodevelopfrom
uco-issue-373
Jun 14, 2022
Merged

(UCO Issue 373) Upgrade rdf-toolkit and Java#90
plbt5 merged 2 commits intodevelopfrom
uco-issue-373

Conversation

@ajnelson-nist
Copy link
Member

@ajnelson-nist ajnelson-nist commented Jun 2, 2022

This Pull Request is part of resolving UCO Issue #373.

This PR is a little out of the normal, ontology-scoped review form, because of a shared technology issue. UCO and CASE both use rdf-toolkit.jar to handle normalizing Turtle data. The upgrade in UCO Issue 373 will upgrade Java and rdf-toolkit.jar to a state that will be incompatible with the version of Java and rdf-toolkit.jar that CASE has "pinned" for its CI.

Hence, the patches in this PR handle two issues:

  1. Delegating to UCO handling of rdf-toolkit.jar retrieval.
  2. Upgrading CASE to also use Java 11.

Review steps taken:

  • Tracking in Jira ticket UCO OC-235
  • Pull request is against correct branch
  • CI passes in (CASE/UCO) feature branch
  • CI passes in (CASE/UCO) current unstable branch (merge-commit)
  • Impact on SHACL validation reviewed for CASE-Examples
  • Impact on SHACL validation remediated for CASE-Examples (N/A)
  • Impact on SHACL validation reviewed for casework.github.io
  • Impact on SHACL validation remediated for casework.github.io

This patch removes all handling of rdf-toolkit.jar from the CASE
ontology repository.  UCO had adopted CASE's rdf-toolkit retrieval in
version 0.7.0, and now UCO Issue 373 will be upgrading the retrieval
process.

This patch handles delegation of rdf-toolkit provisioning.  A follow-on
patch will handle the rdf-toolkit and Java upgrade that is the focus of
UCO Issue 373.

References:
* ucoProject/UCO#373

Signed-off-by: Alex Nelson <alexander.nelson@nist.gov>
Revisions to the Java setup match UCO commit `efce5c1`.

References:
* ucoProject/UCO@efce5c1
* ucoProject/UCO#373

Signed-off-by: Alex Nelson <alexander.nelson@nist.gov>
Copy link
Contributor

@plbt5 plbt5 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In Dutch, we use the abbreviation GB when we don't find any peculiarities worth mentioning. How would that translate in English?

@ajnelson-nist
Copy link
Member Author

In Dutch, we use the abbreviation GB when we don't find any peculiarities worth mentioning. How would that translate in English?

LGTM, "Looks Good To Me," is probably closest.

@plbt5 plbt5 merged commit 6ff8e99 into develop Jun 14, 2022
@plbt5 plbt5 deleted the uco-issue-373 branch June 14, 2022 15:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants