uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Tanenblatt <sloth...@park-slope.net>
Subject Re: ConceptMapper update
Date Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:51:43 GMT
OK, I know I promised an update a while ago, but the holidays and work  
commitments just took over my time. I am *finally* ready with a patch  
that includes a small code change, but more importantly,  
documentation! I created a patch file and will attach it to a JIRA  
issue, just wondering if there is some naming convention for these  
patch files. I would love to get this thing finally released, as it  
has been lingering for way too long.

On Dec 16, 2008, at 7:18 AM, Michael Baessler wrote:

> Thanks for the update, that are good news!
> -- Michael
> Michael Tanenblatt wrote:
>> Just to followup on the comment about ConceptMapper: I am in the  
>> process
>> of putting together documentation right now, and hope to have that  
>> done
>> by the end of this week. There is also a code change that was  
>> requested
>> by someone that I want to make, and then I will do whatever I need  
>> to do
>> to get ConceptMapper released (as I learn the necessary steps...). I
>> have really just been so overwhelmed by other projects to close out  
>> the
>> year that I just had to put ConceptMapper on pause.
>> Michael
>> On Dec 16, 2008, at 2:31 AM, Michael Baessler wrote:
>>> Sorry I'm late... thanks for the reminder.
>>> Here is a +0 from my side.
>>> Let me explain why I'm not so convinced about this submission into  
>>> the
>>> Sandbox.
>>> If I follow the discussion threads it seems to me very similar to  
>>> the
>>> ConceptMapper submission we
>>> had in June 2008. There we added the coded after some discussions to
>>> the Sandbox and now it is there
>>> and nothing (if I check the SVN history) happened after the initial
>>> import. That is from my side a
>>> little bit disappointing. E.g. adding documentation to show the
>>> benefit, merging code with
>>> DictionaryAnnotator concepts, adding some tests to see if all works
>>> fine...
>>> I don't want to block the submission of CFE into the Sandbox, I just
>>> want to share my thoughts.
>>> Maybe it works better this time.
>>> -- Michael
>>> Marshall Schor wrote:
>>>> Please cast your vote to accept the Configurable Feature  
>>>> Extractor into
>>>> the sandbox.
>>>> There was a discussion on this on uima-user list (see
>>>> http://markmail.org/message/ty6eq4ne7r4rvtim ) that ended with a  
>>>> request
>>>> for a Jira submission.  The original did not have documentation.   
>>>> The
>>>> submission has now been updated and documentation included.
>>>> [ ] +1 accept CAS viewer source code into sandbox
>>>> [ ] 0 don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 don't accept, I still have issues
>>>> -Marshall

View raw message