On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Matt Franklin <m.ben.frank...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, January 21, 2013, Benson Margulies wrote: > >> Matt, can you reference the policy that category A deps can't be >> sitting in svn in binary? Of course, these folks can learn to use ivy, >> maven, or maven-ant-tasks to reduce the need for this, but I'd like to >> be clear on whether this is required behavior or not. I thought that a >> source package could incorporate binaries of at least 'A' >> dependencies, but I am happy to be corrected. And svn is yet another >> question. > > > I am referring to this discussion http://s.apache.org/MUZ
Well, that clear enough, even if it is a typical example of how our founders yell at us but we have no mechanism to channel those yells into concise, unambiguous, documentation. > > >> It's common practice to pin to a defined version of a dependency and >> not track it willy-nilly, so 'evolve or change' is not the issue here. > > > Pinning a version is not what I was talking about. Pinning dependencies > can be done many ways and based on the above referenced discussion, copying > compiled jars into source control is not one we engage in. I was just reacting to your remark about evolution, it's not important. The important think is to help these folks get the jars out of the source tree / release package. > > I was specifically referring to the models that are packaged as jars. If > they are produced by cTAKES , then it seems odd to keep them archived in > source control. If they are released by another organization, why are they > not just externally referenced and pulled in at build or run time? > > >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Matt Franklin <m.ben.frank...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Masanz, James J. >> > <masanz.ja...@mayo.edu> wrote: >> >> >> >> Regarding the comment about compiled jars in the source tree: >> >> >> >> The following jars, even though they are under src directories, contain >> resources (models), not Java classes. >> >> >> >> conll-2009-dev-shift-pop.jar >> >> dummy.dep.mod.jar >> >> mayo-dep.jar >> >> wordnet-3.0-lemma-data.jar >> >> dummy.srl.mod.jar >> >> en_srl_ontonotes.jar >> >> mayo-srl.jar >> >> clearparser_models.jar >> >> >> >> degree_of/model.jar >> >> em_pair/model.jar >> >> modifier_extractor/model.jar >> >> >> >> Are there other jars you were referring to? >> > >> > ./ctakes-assertion/lib/jcarafe-core_2.9.1-0.9.8.3.RC4.jar >> > ./ctakes-assertion/lib/jcarafe-ext_2.9.1-0.9.8.3.RC4.jar >> > ./ctakes-assertion/lib/med-facts-i2b2-1.2-SNAPSHOT.jar >> > ./ctakes-assertion/lib/med-facts-zoner-1.1.jar >> > ./ctakes-constituency-parser/lib/libsvm-2.91.jar >> > ./ctakes-coreference/lib/commons-io-2.1.jar >> > ./ctakes-coreference/lib/commons-lang3-3.0.1.jar >> > ./ctakes-coreference/lib/Jama-1.0.2.jar >> > ./ctakes-coreference/lib/libsvm-2.91.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/args4j-2.0.16.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/clearparser-0.33.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/cleartk-util-0.8.1.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/commons-io-2.0.1.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/commons-lang-2.4.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/commons-logging-1.1.1.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/hppc-0.3.1.jar >> > ./ctakes-dependency-parser/lib/uimafit-1.2.0.jar >> > >> > These are just a few that exist in SVN. All dependencies that are >> > compiled code need to be externally referenced. >> > >> > As for the models, I don' think there is any issue in keeping them in >> > jars, but the question is why? Are they never going to evolve or >> > change? Wouldn't you keep them as source and just package them as >> > jars for use at runtime? As I said, this is not an issue, I am just >> > curious. >> > >> >> >> >> I will look at the NOTICE file this afternoon. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> James Masanz >> >> >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: general-return-39326-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org >> >>> [mailto:general-return-39326-Masanz.James= >> mayo....@incubator.apache.org] >> >>> On Behalf Of Masanz, James J. >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 9:51 AM >> >>> To: 'general@incubator.apache.org' >> >>> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache cTAKES 3.0.0-incubating RC5 release >> >>> >> >>> The result of the VOTE for 3.0.0-incubating on the dev list is at >> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ctakes- >> >>> dev/201301.mbox/browser >> >>> >> >>> The source artifact can be found in >> >>> http://people.apache.org/~chenpei/ctakes-3.0.0-incubating/rc5/target/ >> >>> >> >>> I'll look at the jars and the root NOTICE file. >> >>> >> >>> Thanks for your review! >> >>> -- James Masanz >> >>> >> >>> > -----Original Message----- >> >>> > From: general-return-39325-Masanz.James= >> mayo....@incubator.apache.org >> >>> > [mailto:general-return-39325-Masanz.James >> =mayo....@incubator.apache.or >> >>> > g] >> >>> > On Behalf Of Matt Franklin >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
