uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Eckart de Castilho <richard.eck...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Time to push out next release of 2.4.1SDK ?
Date Thu, 30 May 2013 16:01:29 GMT
Am 30.05.2013 um 10:17 schrieb Jörn Kottmann <kottmann@gmail.com>:

> On 04/29/2013 11:02 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> Are there other (major) things that people would like to see in 2.4.1SDK?
> It would probably be really nice to merge parts of the uimaFIT code to configure an AE
> Java Annotations directly into the UIMA core. I don't know how much work that will be,
> but maybe it is possible to do that before the next release?
> If we don't do it now, it might be another year until we have the release after 2.4.1
> Any opinions?

I fear if we start doing that it will delay the release of uimaFIT 2.0.0 and that of 2.4.1.
I'd like to get uimaFIT 2.0.0 out soon because I need to focus on other things for a while.
In particular a DKPro Core 1.5.0 release and the preparations for the GSCL 2013.

Sure it would be nice to have it in core, in particular because the package names of the annotations
then would not change again later. However, as I said when first contributing uimaFIT, there's
still lots of work to be done. The core is expected to be really stable and is released in
0.0.x increments. uimaFIT is released in 0.x.0 increments and while we always tried to by
fully backwards compatible, we sometimes failed in that. 

The @ConfigurationParameter stuff should be pretty stable by now. But there's still work to
be done on the @ExternalResource stuff and some other places. There's still stuff to do after
uimaFIT 2.0.0 and before integrating features into the trunk.

I'd personally let uimaFIT cook for another year or two, get more feedback from the community
on rough edges, stabilize it and then start pushing features over into core. I fear that once
it's in core, it cannot evolve much anymore. I doubt it is a sensible idea to move the configuration
in parts to core (e.g. @ConfigurationParameter but not any other annotations).

So -1 from me.


-- Richard
View raw message