tika-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Mattmann <chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: Java version in Tika
Date Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:09:22 GMT
Hi Keith,

 Got it: yep, I would say, please patch the 1.5 code to use 1.4 and create a
JIRA issue for it. I'll take a look at it as soon as you put it up and we'll
try to get it shepherded into the sources as quickly as possible. Thanks for
your interest in the project!

Cheers,
  Chris



On 9/10/07 9:57 AM, "kbennett" <kbennett@bbsinc.biz> wrote:

> 
> Chris -
> 
> Thanks for the speedy reply.
> 
> There was a little miscommunication.  I meant to enter a JIRA issue to
> switch to 1.4, not 1.5.  If I'm not mistaken, there are 15-20 source files
> that contain collections with type specifications, and will therefore not
> compile in 1.4.)
> 
> Although it will pain me to remove the type specifications ;), I volunteer
> to do so for the greater good.
> 
> - Keith
> 
> 
> 
> Chris Mattmann wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Keith,
>> 
>>  I think at this point, it would be a waste of your time to do the work to
>> convert the code to 1.5. Since it's really a project decision, when the
>> project is ready to move to 1.5 (which it doesn't seem like it is yet),
>> then
>> it would probably make sense at that time to do it, rather than to do it
>> now, and watch your patch widdle away and become out of date with each
>> code
>> change. So, IMO I wouldn't worry about patching the code to use 1.5...yet
>> :)
>> 
>>  As for the JIRA issue, I think it would be a good idea to track (say, as
>> a
>> JIRA "task") the desire to move the code to 1.5. Then we (the developers
>> and
>> community) could vote on the issue, and track it.
>> 
>>  Thanks!
>> 
>> Cheers,
>>   Chris
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/10/07 9:36 AM, "kbennett" <kbennett@bbsinc.biz> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> All -
>>> 
>>> My preference would be to go to 1.5, to use generics, simpler loop
>>> syntax,
>>> and other new features, but it sounds like the concensus is to stay
>>> compatible with 1.4.  If that is the case, would it be helpful for me to
>>> enter a JIRA issue for this?  And make the source code changes?
>>> 
>>> - Keith Bennett
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thilo Goetz wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>>>> On 6/13/07, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> ...Do you think we should require Java 5 in Tika, or should we support
>>>>>> also Java 1.4?...
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think it would be wise for the Tika *framework* to work with Java
>>>>> 1.4.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Specific plugins can require higher versions, but requiring 1.5 for
>>>>> the framework might be too limiting at the moment.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Bertrand
>>>> 
>>>> I agree.  UIMA is also still on Java 1.4, and I think we'll probably
>>>> stay
>>>> there at least for the rest of the year.  So it would be good if the
>>>> basic
>>>> framework could work with 1.4.
>>>> 
>>>> --Thilo
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> ______________________________________________
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
>> Key Staff Member
>> Modeling and Data Management Systems Section (387)
>> Data Management Systems and Technologies Group
>> 
>> _________________________________________________
>> Jet Propulsion Laboratory            Pasadena, CA
>> Office: 171-266B                        Mailstop:  171-246
>> _______________________________________________________
>> 
>> Disclaimer:  The opinions presented within are my own and do not reflect
>> those of either NASA, JPL, or the California Institute of Technology.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

______________________________________________
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
Key Staff Member
Modeling and Data Management Systems Section (387)
Data Management Systems and Technologies Group

_________________________________________________
Jet Propulsion Laboratory            Pasadena, CA
Office: 171-266B                        Mailstop:  171-246
_______________________________________________________

Disclaimer:  The opinions presented within are my own and do not reflect
those of either NASA, JPL, or the California Institute of Technology.



Mime
View raw message