When you say "up", do you mean "up" in terms of svn directory structure, or "up" in terms of quality (so to addons)?
I don't get the difference between "top level" projects and addons projects. Top-level is "mostly" framework, but also includes UIMA-AS. Addons is mostly components, but also contains stuff like the SimpleServer or the PearPackagingAntTask. I'm not even sure as what to count the FsVariables. I don't see exactly how one can refer to all "current" level addons if they have different release cycles. Doing a binary ZIP release bundling all addons whenever any of them changes doesn't seem to be useful. We could set up an aggregator POM which depends on the individual modules in their respective latest versions. But hum… I would personally prefer adding each required dependency individually instead of via an aggregator. What did you have in mind? -- Richard On 19.11.2013, at 19:22, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > There's a "value judgement" about quality / maturity that goes with "sandbox" > - > this sort of loosely implies newer projects that perhaps haven't been wrung > out > as much as other things. > > When we created the addons, we moved most, but not all, of the sandbox > projects > that were add-on - like, to the addons. We left in the sandbox, things people > felt were not ready or were not being maintained or brought up to a similar > quality level as the other projects. > > Having said all of that, I would think that both Ruta and uimaFIT would be > good > to move up, and DUCC may be - but I'd like to see it have a release or 2 and > get > some general usage and a bit more stability before moving it. > > I think that it would be good to have the add-ons gradually change into each > having their own release cycle, to make getting new releases of addons > undergoing change / improvement, easier. > > It would also be good to have some way to continue to refer to all of the > "current" level of add-ons, for those who just want them all... > > Just my 2 cents. > > -Marshall > > > On 11/19/2013 4:52 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I wonder if the current layout of the SVN makes sense as is, >> in particular with respect to the sandbox and addons. >> >> The addons and sandbox have always been released en-bloc. >> Now we have Ruta, uimaFIT and DUCC, which all have their >> own release cycles. However, they are still in sandbox and >> break the "default SVN layout" with branches, tags, and >> trunk there. >> >> I believe there were also considerations of giving other >> modules, e.g. every single add-ons module, its own release cycle. >> >> I think that Ruta, uimaFIT and DUCC should be moved to the same >> level as uimaj, uimacpp, and uima-as. >> >> Any opinions? >> >> Cheers, >> >> -- Richard
