Jõrn makes a good point. There's a general way to pass in parameters to uima pipeline creation, the "additionalParameters" map. So we could define a new key for this map, which would set this mode.
Provided that would address the driving use-case for this issue, I'm fine with that. -Marshall On 2/17/2017 5:39 AM, Joern Kottmann wrote: > Setting this global on JVM level might not be nice if you try to run two > UIMA applications in one process. > Maybe it might be more reasonable to have a way to pass configuration to a > UIMA pipeline when it gets created. > > Jörn > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:47 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> good idea - that provides a way to set things with either -Dxxx or a >> corresponding API call in Java. >> >> Thanks! >> >> >> -Marshall >> >> >> On 2/16/2017 11:57 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: >>> On 16.02.2017, at 14:38, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> A chat with Thilo revealed (regarding setting a flag to suppress >> annotator >>>> logging) he doesn't have access to set -D properties for the JVM launch >> when >>>> running in his environment (e.g. embedded in some Spark context). >>>> >>>> He says an API would work for his use case. >>>> >>>> So, instead of the -Duima.suppress_annotator_logging, I propose to add >> an API >>>> suppressAnnotatorLogging(boolean) to UIMA in 2 places: one in the >> UIMAFramework >>>> and one on the UimaContext. The UIMAFramework one will override if >> set. The >>>> context one will affect the annotators running in that context. >>> What about something like this? That is what I use in DKPro Core JUnit >> Tests. >>> // Route logging through log4j >>> System.setProperty("org.apache.uima.logger.class", >> "org.apache.uima.util.impl.Log4jLogger_impl"); >>> Cheers, >>> >>> -- Richard >>
