Hi VJ, This is an excellent point. In fact, we had significant discussions last year with the NLM on the topic of cTAKES and UMLS resources.
The short summary is that we had an mutual arrangement to do both: 1) Bundle the customized UMLS dictionaries that were designed to work with cTAKES as a resource. Have code to perform a License validation check via their web service upon init time. [There is a known caveat that users could bypass this check by modifying the open source code or attempting to use the special in-memory db resource files directly.] 2) There may be a limited amount of users who may choose to download UMLS resource (completely formatted to work with cTAKES) bundled once. - Users who may have restricted internet access which would not be able to connect to the Restful UMLS validation service. - Users who may wish for a Production system not to be dependent on an external service check. Example: http://chipweb2.chip.org/cTAKES_Resources/index.jsp The recorded archive on this topic is available at (If you were curious on the full discussion thread, I can forward that to you): https://webmeeting.nih.gov/p73873830/ cTAKES actually has also added as one of their UMLS Community User Contributors: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/implementation_resources/community/index.html Depending on the ASF requirements, and based on the above options, cTAKES itself should be able to handle and have flexibility either way(either option 1,2 or both). It would be great if someone here could help us clarify the ASF requirement here (In case ASF could actually be more restrictive). Thanks, Pei -----Original Message----- From: vijay garla [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 6:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: podling release managment Regarding the LICENSE - I think going forward we should put some thought into what UMLS sources to distribute with cTAKES in light of license restrictions. Especially put some thought if you want to check that in to a publicly accessible SVN repository. I think that it is OK to redistribute the RXNORM lucene index as this is a restriction free (level 0) UMLS source vocabulary. I do not think that it is ok to distribute the SNOMED-CT HSQLDB - this requires that users agree to a license (level 2). I have to say that I am not a lawyer, and my head hurts when I try to understand the NLM's UMLS/UTS license. I know that to use the dictionary lookup with the distributed SNOMED-CT, users need to enter their UMLS license. That is may follow the spirit of the UMLS license, but I'm not sure if that follows the letter. Those without a valid UMLS license could still access the data in the SNOMED-CT HSQLDB files directly. As an alternative, you could set up a separate download site (perhaps outside of apache) that users could get the HSQLDB SNOMED-CT files from; access to this download site would require a valid UMLS license. This is what we did for YTEX. Best, VJ On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Chen, Pei <[email protected]>wrote: > Thanks. > While we wait for infra to import the svn dump file ( > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5079), > what would you suggest we call this upcoming release (aka. what would > have been called 2.6 in sourceforge [with old package names and > structure, etc].) Should we start using standard release names such as: > apache-ctakes-0.1.0-incubating? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jörn Kottmann [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 5:24 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: podling release managment > > On 07/25/2012 11:17 PM, Chen, Pei wrote: > > I just stumbled across this and thought it may be a good read for > > those > involved... > > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html > > > > This is an important part of the release to get right: > > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practic > e-license > > The LICENSE and NOTICE files must contain information about the 3rd > party stuff you ship with your release, if something is missing there > you will likely not get the release through the Incubator vote. > > Jörn >
