Hi all, as a follow-up I’ve created OPENNLP-1708 and a path for OpenNLP 3.x, see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-1708
Jira login required for all details. Feel free to add additional hints/pointers, create new sub-tasks and share creative ideas. Gruß Martin — > Am 12.03.2025 um 18:31 schrieb Martin Wiesner <mawie...@apache.org>: > > Thanks Jeff for sharing your thoughts on this. > I think, we should aim for backward compatibility as much as possible. > > Since no other feedback arrived (so far) for this thread, we’ll assume lazy > consensus for the outlined modularization of Apache OpenNLP for the target > release 3.x and onwards. > > A new (epic) Jira issue and related branch will therefore be opened soon. > I’ll inform the list again, once both things have happened. > > Gruß > Martin > -- > >> Am 14.02.2025 um 22:26 schrieb Jeff Zemerick <jzemer...@apache.org>: >> >> I think that's a good path to go down. >> >> I also think it would be ok to *not* maintain compatibility with the >> existing CLI in places where things can be improved. While backward >> compatibility is helpful, a new major release implies there may be breaking >> changes. I don't have a good feel for how many users there are of the CLI >> but if I had to guess I would expect it to be somewhat low in comparison to >> users who integrate OpenNLP in their code. I'm happy to have my guess >> challenged though. >> >> Would this be a good time to take a look at the things in the >> opennlp-sandbox and see if anything can be moved over to the main project? >> >> Thanks, >> Jeff >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 7:17 AM Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> FYI: Have invited the user list last week: >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/wgj7oovl4ls7pmpbvbc9hoo895whjpd5 >>> >>> On 2025/02/13 11:35:49 Martin Wiesner wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> thanks Bruno for sharing your thoughts. >>>> >>>> Obviously, I’m a +1 for the idea of a more modularized form of opennlp >>> core components, see Richard's original post. >>>> >>>> To get things rolling, I’d suggest: >>>> The feedback and early conceptual phase could be open until say March >>> 1st 2025. Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Any more feedback is highly welcome. Should we, in addition, share the >>> modularization proposal (3.x) on the users list so the community can join >>> the discussion? >>>> >>>> Please participate in this discussion, especially if you are a senior >>> committer and/or PMC member of the OpenNLP project. >>>> >>>> Gruß >>>> Martin >>>> — >>>> >>>>> Am 09.02.2025 um 10:09 schrieb Bruno Kinoshita < >>> brunodepau...@gmail.com>: >>>>> >>>>> Sounds like a good plan, especially "We also aim to maintain backward >>>>> compatibility" 👍 >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 at 11:06, Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin and I were sitting on the ICE from Berlin back to Heilbronn >>> and had >>>>>> a discussion about modernizing OpenNLP's module structure. >>>>>> We also discussed that idea with Atita off-list in Berlin two days >>> ago :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Our main goal is to split the CLI parts and define a solid API module, >>>>>> along with well-structured dependent modules something like „api“, >>> „cli“, >>>>>> „core“, „addons“, ... >>>>>> >>>>>> We also aim to maintain backward compatibility for the CLI, ensuring >>> that >>>>>> users can still grab the distribution binary or „opennlp-tools“ via >>> Maven >>>>>> as before. >>>>>> >>>>>> By implementing these changes, we believe OpenNLP will become more >>>>>> modular, flexible, and easier to maintain. >>>>>> This should make it easier to integrate OpenNLP into core libraries >>> while >>>>>> improving maintainability for future use cases. >>>>>> >>>>>> Our proposal would be, that we start with OpenNLP 3.x on a separate >>> branch >>>>>> to try things out and call this a step towards the 3.x series of >>> OpenNLP. >>>>>> >>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>> >>>>>> Gruß >>>>>> Richard >>>> >>>> >>> >
