Skip to content

Review order and staging for the open upstream PRs #61

Open

Description

@jdsika

Staging for how the open upstream PRs get reviewed. Nothing here is applied upstream yet; the proposed upstream descriptions are on the fork mirrors (top of each, marked "Proposed upstream description").

Merge order

# Upstream Fork mirror (own diff) Source to read Reviewer Before upstream
1 linkml#3716 propertyNames #16 39 approved (Corey) rebase only; merge
2 linkml#4168 fallback base, TriG #60 65 into linkml#3704's branch; unblocks it –
3 linkml#3993 deterministic serialization docs #27 docs 22 Corey none now; whichever of linkml#3993 / linkml#3704 lands second adjusts the "optional dependency" sentence
4 linkml#4144 JSON-LD 1.1 @version #56 13 Corey rebased onto main as 21045aa36 (2026-11-04)
5 linkml#4171 instantiates in gen-owl #31 41 unassigned –
6 linkml#3989 rules: presence implies value #19 683 Kevin (changes requested 10-05, addressed) body: since-review note, questions moved into the body
7 linkml#3990 rules: compositional fallback + linkml#3991 docs folded in #20 (fold staged in #62) 496 Kevin push #62's commit to linkml#3990's branch, close linkml#3991 / fork #23
8 linkml#4156 URI term kinds #32 549 Corey merged 2026-10-30 (squash 983332464)
9 linkml#4157 declared annotation terms #58 184 Corey merged 2026-11-04 (merge commit 0816d1bda)
10 linkml#4158 annotation property roles #59 177 unassigned 7fc0443aa; Corey merged main into it (359a263c2, 2026-11-04)
11 linkml#4028 class-level expressions #29 754 Kevin after linkml#3989; drop the duplicate helpers on rebase
12 linkml#4169 range_expression #30 225 unassigned –
13 linkml#4170 has_member #34 323 unassigned –
14 linkml#3446 --normalize-prefixes #4 478 Kevin (matentzn commented) mark ready (gh pr ready 3446)

Conflicts: the bases linkml#3989, linkml#4028 and linkml#4156 conflict pairwise in shaclgen.py (small hunks); whichever lands first, the others rebase. linkml#3446 conflicts with three stacks and linkml#4144, so it goes last. linkml#3716 conflicts with linkml#4028 only in tests.

Decisions taken

Upstream checklist (after approval)

Draft: message to matentzn (triager), from Carlo

Hi Nico, to make my open PRs easier to review I put the merge order at the top of each, with what to read first: linkml#3716 → linkml#4168 → linkml#3993 → linkml#4144 → linkml#4171 → linkml#3989 → linkml#3990 → linkml#4156 → linkml#4157 → linkml#4158 → linkml#4028 → linkml#4169 → linkml#4170 → linkml#3446. The first five are small (under 70 lines of source each, linkml#3716 is approved). linkml#4156 needs one decision, stated in three lines at its top. linkml#4157, linkml#4158, linkml#4169, linkml#4170 and linkml#4171 have no reviewer yet; could you assign them? I folded linkml#3991 into linkml#3990, so it's one PR fewer.

Draft: comment on linkml#4174, from Carlo

Hi, linkml#4157 handles the same case the other way: it writes a bare see_also: README as a plain literal with a warning, because a value that is neither an IRI nor a CURIE has no absolute IRI (RDF 1.1 §3.2), and OWL 2 admits a literal as an annotation value (§10.1). Resolving it against the default namespace gives an IRI the author may not have meant. Could we settle on one behaviour? I'm happy to align linkml#4157 if the maintainers prefer yours.

Draft: edit of the April comment on linkml#3446

Update 2026-10-30: no longer blocked. The prefixmaps git pin is gone; the names come from prefixmaps' curated linked_data context and rdflib's defaults, as described in the PR.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions