uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Klügl <pklu...@uni-wuerzburg.de>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache UIMA TextMarker RC2 AND Composite Repository
Date Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:44:02 GMT
Am 29.01.2013 20:25, schrieb Marshall Schor:
> http://people.apache.org/~pkluegl/uima-releases/TextMarker-2.0.0-rc2/src_bin/
> directory,
> there are multiple files where the version is missing, and instead is the
> literal string ${parseVersion.osgiVersion}.

I already observed this in RC1, but I have not investigated this 
problem, because it also happens for the other uima plugins, e.g., 

> I think these need to be fixed - so the version is included in the released file
> name.
> Also, what is the purpose of this whole directory?  I think perhaps all of the
> "jars" having compiled classed and their associated signatures/checksum files
> can be deleted?  My Reasoning:

Yes. My reason for providing all those files was the fact that those 
files are uploaded to the staging repository. I read something that 
these files should also be provided in the webspace in order to 
facilitate the reviewing.

If those poms are not needed, then there is maybe no problem so solve.

> these Jars are for the convenience of users.  But users won't be using them via
> this path.  They'll either be using them via Eclipse update site, or (less
> likely?) via pulling them as dependencies from Maven Central.

I must admit that I already wondered how and in which form TextMarker 
will be released. There is the update site for the workbench, of course. 
However, there are maybe some people (maybe in Richards group) that are 
using TextMarker rules directly in some maven-built projects, without 
the Workbench, only adding some maven dependency. Even users of the 
workbench will eventually integrate the developed analysis engines in 
some applications that are maybe built with maven. Then, there should 
maybe also be the option to download all binaries (uima-textmarker.jar 
and the plugins), similar to the uimaj release. If not, then non-maven 
developers have to get/download somehow the update site and add the 
engine plugin as an library.

> So, there's no need to include them here, I think.

Should I remove them for the next RC? I just added as much as possible 
in order to not forget anything.



> -Marshall
> On 1/28/2013 8:58 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>> Hi,
>> the second release candidate of the sandbox project Apache UIMA TextMarker is
>> ready for voting. This vote also includes our new composite repository.
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-183/
>> SVN tag:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/sandbox/TextMarker/tags/uimaj-textmarker-parent-2.0.0-rc2
>> Archive with all sources:
>> http://people.apache.org/~pkluegl/uima-releases/TextMarker-2.0.0-rc2/uimaj-textmarker-parent-2.0.0-source-release.zip
>> Composite repository with three update sites: uimaj, uima-as and
>> uima-textmarker-2.0.0:
>> http://people.apache.org/~pkluegl/uima-releases/TextMarker-2.0.0-rc2/eclipse-update-site
>> Binaries and sources:
>> http://people.apache.org/~pkluegl/uima-releases/TextMarker-2.0.0-rc2/src_bin
>> The issues fixed are in the RELEASE_NOTES.html in the src/bin packages.
>> They can also be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%222.0.0TextMarker%22%20AND%20component%20%3D%20TextMarker%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
>> Documentation (pdf file):
>> http://people.apache.org/~pkluegl/uima-releases/TextMarker-2.0.0-rc2/tools.textmarker.book.pdf
>> Please vote on release:
>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>> Thanks.
>> Peter

View raw message