UIMA v3 is now out as beta, and the next release should be 3.0.0 (no more alpha/beta suffixes).
It will have an Eclipse Update Site. Previously, the Eclipse Update Site subsite name for features/plugins for this has been: uimaj - for the v2 things (part of the "composite" site) uimaj-v3-pre-production (not in the "composite" site) The intent here was to reduce "accidents" where people just installed the "latest" uimaj plugins, only to find they didn't work with their v2 projects. We also have split the svn source repo by having a high-level qualifier for V3 stuff. This allowed having two "trunks" etc. under uimaj-v3 and uimaj, uima-as and uima-as-v3, and maintaining these (using svn merge, etc.) For releases, it would be less complex I think if we keep with the common naming, and just depend on the version number (2 or 3). I see other projects like TomCat doing similar things. But there are two choices for the Eclipse Update Site. One choice would go back to having the traditional organization, with both 2.x and 3.x versions of the features/plugins, and it would be up to the installer to install the proper one. An alternative: require a "v3" style composite update site, say eclipse-update-site-v3: users would go to that or the other one, depending. This might be less error-prone? I'm on the fence with this choice; what do others think? -Marshall
