It looks like the general consensus is for # 2) Leave them in the ASF repo, but as separate modules/project(s). Which means we (the community) will take on the risk (security, ip, license, etc.) and responsibility for the models that we commit. I'll take a stab at this today... Does anyone think it's worthwhile to (a) lump them all together and call it a ctakes-resources project/model for pragmatic reasons? Otherwise (b), we'll have a resource module for each such as ctakes-core-res, ctakes-pos-tagger-res, etc.?
--Pei > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karthik > Sarma > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 1:35 PM > To: cTAKES Developer List > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Where should cTAKES models live? > > I concur. +1 for option 2 -- I do not really see any advantages that option > 3 could have over option 2, as the difference should be largely transparent to > users (and even developers) > > > > > > -- > Karthik Sarma > UCLA Medical Scientist Training Program Class of 20?? > Member, UCLA Medical Imaging & Informatics Lab Member, CA Delegation > to the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association > [email protected] > gchat: [email protected] > linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/ksarma > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Masanz, James J. > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > I also am +1 for option 2. > > > > #3 is my least favorite, because of the download time for some of the > > models, both for cases like Steve mentioned but also for cases of > > wanting to check out a fresh copy of the code and not wanting to wait > > to check out the models again > > > > -- James > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: > > > ctakes-dev-return-1378- > [email protected] > > > [mailto:ctakes-dev-return-1378-Masanz.James= > > [email protected]] > > > On Behalf Of Steven Bethard > > > Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 1:06 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Where should cTAKES models live? > > > > > > On Mar 15, 2013, at 4:39 PM, "Chen, Pei" > > > <[email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > So the question is: What should we do with the model files? Some > > > options include: > > > > > > > > 1) Leave them in SourceForge/Maven Central. Maven can download > > and > > > include them in the convenience binaries in the ctakes-distribution > > > project. Something we did quickly for 3.0, but needs to be improved > > > if we go with this approach. For example: [2] > > > > > > > > 2) Leave them in the ASF repo, but separate modules/projects. > > > > > > > > 3) Keep them in the same respective ASF modules under > > > /src/main/resources > > > > > > > > I think it's nice to keep these fairly large (~1GB) and static > > > > resource > > > files separate from the source code (Either option 1 or 2). Also, > > > option > > > 1 will require a little more work by the committers/release managers > > > but will definitely avoid any licensing issues/concerns. > > > > > > I'd definitely vote for (2). That makes releases much easier than if > > > you have to coordinate between the ASF and Sourceforge repositories, > > > but also allows people to depend on the code in a module without > > > also pulling in all the models as well. (This would make a lot of > > > sense even now, for example, in ctakes-temporal which depends on > > > ctakes-relation-extractor only for the relation extraction framework > > > and not for the location_of > > and > > > degree_of models.) > > > > > > Steve > >
