+1 for 1.7 (also due to lemmatized changes and removal of deprecated code).
On 8 November 2016 at 09:48, Rodrigo Agerri <rage...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello, > > +1 1.7.0 in next release and +1 for a yearly release > > Just to provide some info, the main changes in the lemmatizer have been: > > 1. Added a supervised statistical lemmatizer, usable from the CLI and > API. The supervised lemmaitzer now provides a much better coverage for > unknown words with respect to the previously existing dictionary-based > one. > 2. The lemmatizer component has been rewritten and the API therefore > has substantially changed. Thus, the changes in the Dictionary-based > lemmatizer are not backward compatible. In any case, I do not think > that so many people was using it and the change at using the API is > minor. > > The new statistical lemmatizer can support the Dictionary-based > lemmatizers often used to provide features for components such as Word > Sense Disambiguation, Opinion Mining/Sentiment Analysis, etc. In this > regard, it will be nice to aim at working on the development of those > two components for their release. Maybe the next release is too close, > but definitely for the next one. > > Cheers, > > Rodrigo > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Russ, Daniel (NIH/CIT) [E] > <dr...@mail.nih.gov> wrote: > > Also the lemmatizer has significantly changed. I vote 1.7 > > > > On 11/7/16, 12:59 PM, "Joern Kottmann" <kottm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > since our last release it has been a while and we received quite a > few > > changes which would be nice to get released. > > > > There are still some open Jira issues, but mostly smaller things that > > can be wrapped up rather quickly. > > > > Is there anything important missing which should go into the next > > release? Otherwise I think we should also aim for more frequent > > released and just make one again early next year, with all the stuff > we > > might miss out now. > > > > We took in a patch - as part of OPENNLP-830 - to replace our > self-made > > hash table with the java.util.HashMap. This change is not backward > > compatible for folks who extend AbstractModel. > > > > Should we go with 1.6.1 as a next version or should we make 1.7.0 to > > reflect that? > > > > Previously we only had backward incompatible changes in versions > which > > bumped by the second number. Maybe that is better choice. It will > > probably break some peoples code when they update. > > > > We also have lots of deprecated API still in OpenNLP, should we try > to > > remove as much as possible of it now? > > > > Jörn > > > > >
