uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marshall Schor <...@schor.com>
Subject Re: thoughts on eclipse update site and Uima v3
Date Fri, 12 Jan 2018 16:54:29 GMT
I realize I left something out. For the uimaj-j (the new JCas oriented version
of uima, also known as uimaj-v3), eclipse plugins depending on this should be in
a separate Eclipse Composite update site.

Following the conventions in the other naming note posted to the dev list, we
would have:

eclipseUpdateSite  <- composite site
  uimaj
  uima-as
  ruta

and

eclipseUpdateSite-j 
   uimaj-j
   uima-as-J
   ruta-J

or something like that.

-Marshall

On 1/11/2018 5:11 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> Once we release uimaj-3.0.0SDK, it will have associated eclipse plugins.
> The plugins will be compatible with v3; the v2 plugins will be compatible with v2.
>
> Currently, we are distinguishing projects that have a v2 and a v3 version
> following the naming convention:
>
> v2:  proj-name
> v3:  proj-name-v3
>
> We could do this also for eclipse update sites, by having a new top-level update
> site.
> Currently:
>   consolidated top level:  www.apache.org/dist/uima/eclipse-update-site
>     subsites for /uimaj/, /ruta/, /uima-as/, and /uimaj-v3-pre-production/
>
> Proposed:
>     subsites:  /uimaj, /ruta/, /uima-as/,
>                /uimaj-v3/, /ruta-v3/, /uima-as-v3/ 
>                (over time, these three components will have both v2 and
v3 versions)
>                
>
> Alternatively, we could just have the sites all together.  The disadvantage is
> that it makes it harder (more error prone) when users are not ready to switch to
> v3, because the "default" in eclipse is to show only the most recent version.
> Doing it this way makes it more explicit to users.
>
> I think we will have for some time users on both the v2 and v3 platforms.
>
> WDYT?
>
> -Marshall
>


Mime
View raw message