Initialize project structure

[natebass]

I created a python project structure based on the Poetry poetry new command. This is just to get some code started. After this, we can take a higher-level view of what we want this project to accomplish.

• Use the argument "-f" for specifying a file to parse.
• Read an RDF file (tests/data/doap.rdf) and print the project name.
• Run one test with Pytest.

Here are some discussion points.

Project package name

The package name is be_graph_local_py. Should we simplify this to something different like graph_local or be_graph_local?

src/ folder

I believe the package name and folder be_graph_local_py functions the same as a seperate src/ folder.

File copyright

There is a copyright at the top of each file in the doc/ folder that I copied from ov-tessellation. I find & replaced ov-tessellation with be-graph-local-py.

VSCode

I added configuration files for VSCode with recommended extentions and Run/Debug configurations like "-f" for specifying a file. I ignored the IntelliJ folder. I want to use VSCode as the "supported editor", possibly adding documentation specific to it, to make it easy for people to get started. I am open to feedback on this.

[natebass]

@DanHugoDanHugo project.toml has authors = ["natebass <nw3455@gmail.com>"]. Should we add/remove this field to include Project-ACT like in the copyright of doc files?

[DanHugoDanHugo]

@natebass
I was going to start a normal Agile process now that the base for AfV is spelled out, so fill in some blue sky (that is mostly okay to start, the first theme, at least one epic, some features, and user stories, then start with tasks on the component project for implementation…

This makes a good example, I think, and we can talk about it (Conversation is one of the 3 C's of Agile for Volunteers…).

I actually have a plan for the be- and also fe- graph-local tools (and the rest of the tessellation initiative), hex architecture of course, making use of typer for be- and textual for a tui fe-, eventually enabling a web interface and use as github action for the be-…

All that said, great question about the author in the package. I assume most packaging schemes will have something similar, I wonder if they are implying the canonical use of AUTHORS…

https://google.github.io/opencasebook/authorship/
https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/releasing/authors

(I swear there´s a GitHub page about CONTRIBUTORS vs AUTHORS somewhere, or maybe not… basically, CONTRIBUTORS is a long list of people doing a variety of things, AUTHORS are significant contributors, possibly with legal responsibility and maybe with other entities as collaborators… so your point about making the author the org rather than one person is probably the way to go, I´ll look around for some examples).