On 12/12/2012 8:38 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: >>> You could also want to make minor or major releases independent from the >>> UIMA release cycle, e.g. when you introduce new features, change the script >>> grammar or do other potentially incompatible changes (e.g. fully qualified >>> type names and aliases for them? ;) ). >> Yes, I agree. >> >> What about the version numbers of uimafit? Do they remain the same (1.5.0)? >> >> …btw... after uimafit completely arrived, we need to talk about how >> TextMarker can interact better with the uimafit concepts :-) > I'd rather tend towards a 2.0.0 since all the package names and stuff will > change. It's going to be interesting if and what kind of backwards > compatibility can be provided. I have yet to dive down into the dirty details.
One thing we did in UIMA for this kind of a change was to deliver a code-change tool. IIRC, it walked over a user source tree and and did a bunch of rename-like changes. http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/overview_and_setup.html#ugr.project_overview_migrating_from_ibm_uima -Marshall > > -- Richard >
