I'll have an update shortly - I think you mean trim the manual? The README is already pretty small.
I only have this here to drive the discussion, it's a big (and smart)!) direction. I'll file a PR for it right after the next push and keep it in draft. This is nowhere near complete. Once we create the PR draft, if everyone agrees, we will focus the convo there. That's not to say we'll ignore this thread, just that the system of record for updates should be the PR draft. Per Martin's suggestion regarding others and building, I can take on any responsibilities or duties that arise from this. On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 9:18 AM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> wrote: > Can we have this in a PR view plz? So it is possible to review more > cleanly. > I suggest to trim down the README and align the wording to our main > repository. > > In addition, we need to clarify how we handle security or how addons > aligns with the current public available security model. > More over, we should discuss if it needs merge request approval before > pushing into the main branch. > > > Am 08.09.2026 um 15:08 schrieb Kristian Rickert <[email protected]>: > > > > Hey everyone, > > > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp-addons/tree/OPENNLP-1924-canary-addon > > > > This is the proposed add-on shape: > > > > * org.apache.opennlp.addons package name for the dependencies > > * separate manual, same format > > * initial cleanup > > * Added a summary of our conversation so far on how we should handle it. > > I'll remove it before release... > > > > I'd love to get this going so I can start moving the current branches > into > > addons. I'd have each feature be its own PR. It'll significantly clean > up > > the open PRs in the core. > > > > Last, we may want one small PR in core: a consistent way to load SPI > > loaders. Nothing complex, just a simple generic setup. > > > > Kristian > >
