Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-discussion] Protege and Source Control

Bertram Stuart sjbertram at taz.qinetiq.com
Mon Nov 10 00:58:00 PST 2008


The problem with zipping them (or at least the problem we have with 
Subversion source control on Protege files) is that you'd still end up 
with files that you can't easily compare. Protege has no concept of 
ordering, and so can end up reorganising things at random. That means 
you may only have changed one character in a string value of a slot, but 
your diff with source control will show thousands of changes as 
everything gets moved around.

In terms of solutions, we've not really found one. All we do is put it 
in to source control as-is (because they're just text files and 
Subversion can handle text files) and lose the ability to diff the 
files. We've yet to check whether the experimental Protege XML files are 
more diff-able, although even if they're not then an XLST might be able 
to re-order without losing data.

Regards,

Stuart Bertram


Jonathan Carter wrote:
> Hi Matt,
> 
> Normally, when I used Protege with more than 1 user, I use the 
> client-server mode, which works well for multi-users and can track 
> changes etc. However, I appreciate that if you are working 
> collaboratively but offline, that this isn't going to work for you.
> 
> One option to try would be to zip up the PINS, PONT and PPRJ files into 
> an archive that a version control tool could manage as some kind of 'blob'.
> 
> However, what I've done in lieu of anything too technical is just 
> applying good practice with using the project - passing the 3 files 
> around and before releasing my work back to the group doing a 
> File->SaveAs and manually updating the version number - Protege 
> synchronises the 3 files from that perspective. So, I received 
> project_v1.0.pprj, work on it and save it back as project_v.1.1.pprj (or 
> something) before lodging it with the group. 
> 
> Clearly, you need to organise a way of "checking out" the project for 
> editing, but in practice, for a small-ish group this is workable. For 
> larger groups, the multi-user Protege is really the best way forward.
> 
> Hope this helps
> 
> Jonathan
> __________________________________________
> Jonathan Carter - Head of Technical Architecture
> Enterprise Architecture Solutions Ltd
> __________________________________________
> 
> Assess your EA maturity at:
> www.enterprise-architecture.com/EAvaluator 
> <http://www.enterprise-architecture.com/EAvaluator>
> __________________________________________
> 
> On 7 Nov 2008, at 17:06, Matt Spitz wrote:
> 
>> I'm doing a group project using Protege, and as I've learned with all
>> group projects, the first step is source control.  Given that the
>> Protege files are all text-based, I held out a lot of hope for being
>> able to use version control.  Sadly, I was mistaken.
>>
>> It'd be really neat if the Protege files were formatted in such a way
>> that source control software won't barf on them.  Does anyone have any
>> suggestions as to how to get around this and be able to use my
>> ontology files (pons, pins, pprj) in a source control setting?
>>
>> Thank you very much!
>>
>> -Matt Spitz
>> _______________________________________________
>> protege-discussion mailing list
>> protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu 
>> <mailto:protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu>
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>>
>> Instructions for unsubscribing: 
>> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> protege-discussion mailing list
> protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
> 
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03 

The information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent 
correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended 
recipient(s).  The information in this communication may be 
confidential and/or legally privileged.  Nothing in this e-mail is 
intended to conclude a contract on behalf of QinetiQ or make QinetiQ 
subject to any other legally binding commitments, unless the e-mail 
contains an express statement to the contrary or incorporates a formal Purchase Order.

For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, 
distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance 
on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Emails and other electronic communication with QinetiQ may be 
monitored and recorded for business purposes including security, audit 
and archival purposes.  Any response to this email indicates consent 
to this.

Telephone calls to QinetiQ may be monitored or recorded for quality 
control, security and other business purposes.

QinetiQ Limited
Registered in England & Wales: Company Number:3796233
Registered office: 85 Buckingham Gate, London SW1E 6PD, United Kingdom
Trading address: Cody Technology Park, Cody Building, Ively Road, Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 0LX, United Kingdom 
http://www.qinetiq.com/home/notices/legal.html



More information about the protege-discussion mailing list