Re: Logging in OpenNLP

Hi, > On 19. Dec 2022, at 20:46, Jeff Zemerick wrote: > > For C, having minimal dependencies is a good idea in general but I think it > gets to a point where it can be hard when you want your library to play > well with others. I don't think I would object to an SLF4J dependency if > the

Re: Training of MaxEnt Model with large corpora fails with java.io.UTFDataFormatException

Hi, > On 11. Apr 2022, at 14:50, Zowalla, Richard > wrote: > > This works fine for mid size corpora (just need a little bit of RAM and > time). However, we are running into the exception mentioned in [1]. > Debugging into the DataOutputStream reveals, that this is a limitation > of the

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenNLP Models trained on UD

On 12. Mar 2021, at 14:39, Jeff Zemerick wrote: > > This vote is to release the models as version 1.0. (The models are still > available in the Dropbox folder at > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/p8focuz0qwvw84b/AAC6GqO8mqZn_xkAqHZsVAsoa?dl=0= > along with text files showing the training and

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.2 Release Candidate 2

On 11.09.2017, at 09:12, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > I have posted a second release candidate for the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.2 > release and it is ready for testing. +1 (non-binding) -- Richard

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.2 Release Candidate

On 05.09.2017, at 00:41, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > I have posted a first release candidate for the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.2 > release and it is ready for testing. I ran the DKPro Core OpenNLP module tests against 1.8.2 and all looks good there. So from a user's perspective here

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.1 Release Candidate

On 02.07.2017, at 19:13, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > Hello, > > one question, did you retrain or use existing models? The respective unit-test trains and evaluates - doesn't use an existing model. Cheers, -- Richard

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 3

Hi, On 18.05.2017, at 17:17, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > @Richard, it would be nice if you could vote as well so we know that what > we have now in RC 3 works for you. I have locally applied the DKPro Core patch from William and tested it against the RC3 staged artifacts.

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2

Hi William, > On 16.05.2017, at 14:35, William Colen wrote: > > I cloned DKPro code and tried Rodrigo proposed changes. Your test passes > with it. cool :) Would you like to contribute the changes to DKPro Core? Cheers, -- Richard

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2

> On 15.05.2017, at 16:35, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > Richard, I believe I found the problem with the parser, would you mind to > take a look? > > This PR should fix it: > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/pull/199 The parser test works nicely with the PR. The lemmatizer

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2

Hi all, > On 11.05.2017, at 18:37, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. Should OpenNLP 1.8.0 yield identical results as 1.7.2 when the same models are used during classification? E.g.

Re: 1.7.2 release

On 01.02.2017, at 14:35, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > The project is now more agile and we can cut a release without a lot of > overhead. We spent years working toward that goal. > Now we will release a major version 1.x.0 every quarter and one or two > minor 1.x.y versions every

Re: 1.7.2 release

Hi Jörn, I am curious - is there a specific reason that OpenNLP suddenly has this flurry of activity? Best, -- Richard > On 31.01.2017, at 13:45, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > Dear all, > > We will be making a 1.7.2 release of OpenNLP today. All issues in jira are > closed

Re: OpenNLP model for model 1.7.3+

I think incompatible models would warrant at least an increase in the minor version number (1.8.x) if not even in the major version number... If they can be reformatted from the binary versions (i.e. without retraining), if would be great if OpenNLP would include a migration tool. Mind this

Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.7.1 Release Candidate 1

Built DKPro Core against the RC and ran the unit tests. Looks good ;) -- Richard > On 21.01.2017, at 00:18, Suneel Marthi wrote: > > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > 1.7.1 Release Candidate. > > The Release artifacts can be

Re: OpenNLP - Model version 1.6.0 not supported by this (1.5.3) version of OpenNLP

On 13.01.2017, at 11:41, David Samuel Lim wrote: > > After all that has said, I have a question: > > *Why is it that when the references to the OpenNLP 1.6.0 libraries are > removed, the program "reverts" back to OpenNLP 1.5.3, and how do I undo > this? (i.e. when I

Re: OpenNLP - Model version 1.6.0 not supported by this (1.5.3) version of OpenNLP

On 13.01.2017, at 08:29, David Samuel Lim wrote: > > *> Maybe OpenNLP classes are included in some non-OpenNLP JAR as well that > you use in your project?* > > Sorry, I'm personally not sure what you mean by this. Could you please > clarify? Sometimes people create

Re: OpenNLP 1.7.0 RC 2 is ready for testing

On 01.01.2017, at 02:41, Suneel Marthi wrote: > > The release has been finalized - please find the 1.7.0 release artifacts at > http://www.apache.org/dist/opennlp/opennlp-1.7.0/ Hm, I only saw two binding votes instead of the usual three ones [1]. Jörn: +1 William: +1

Re: OpenNLP 1.7.0 RC 2 is ready for testing

Was the RC2 cancelled? The staging repo doesn't seem to exist (anymore)? Best, -- Richard > On 31.12.2016, at 22:16, William Colen wrote: > > +1 > > > 2016-12-31 19:01 GMT-02:00 Suneel Marthi : > >> +1 non-binding >> >> 1. Verified Sigs and

Re: OpenNLP 1.7.0 RC 1 is ready for testing

Hi William, thanks for the RC. I have tried upgrading DKPro Core to the RC1 and most of the tests work, however, in one case I get this message: Caused by: opennlp.tools.util.InvalidFormatException: Model version 1.6.0 is not supported by this (1.7.0) version of OpenNLP! at

Re: Migrate to Git?

Keeping site and code in separate repos: +1 -- Richard > On 19.08.2016, at 15:17, Anthony Beylerian > wrote: > > @Jörn @Richard > > I believe less bloat is always better for code housekeeping. > For example, although it is small, I think having the site code

Re: Migrate to Git?

I don't have a vote here, but I'd agree with Jörn: Separate repos will make it more uncomfortable to track changes across components. Should the project switch to a uniform versioning and joint releases, that would also be more problematic. The project is not particularly large. Having

Re: Models 1.5 site is down?

You can try this URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/opennlp/files/models-1.5/ Cheers, -- Richard > On 13.07.2016, at 07:51, Zack Teater wrote: > > OpenNLP Dev-- > > From the Wiki, I navigated to: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Models > > From

OpenNLP maxent model trained with wrong encoding

Hi all, I noticed that the OpenNLP German POS Tagger maxent model available from Sourceforge has been trained using the wrong encoding setting. Apparently the input data was UTF-8, but it was read as ISO8859-1. The perceptron model is not affected. I only examined NER and POS models, not

Re: GSoC 2015 - WSD Module

On 05.06.2015, at 14:24, Anthony Beylerian anthonybeyler...@hotmail.com wrote: So just to make sure, we are currently relying on JWNL to access WordNet as a resource. There is a more modern fork of JWNL available called http://extjwnl.sourceforge.net . It includes provisions of loading

Re: OpenNLP 1.6.0 RC 4 ready for testing

the process necessary for a release, and are not meant for general consumption. Cheers, -- Richard On 01.06.2015, at 16:29, Richard Eckart de Castilho richard.eck...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, this is not a release - it is a release CANDIDATE. The procedure used here is the typical Apache procedure

Re: OpenNLP 1.6.0 RC 4 ready for testing

Hi, this is not a release - it is a release CANDIDATE. The procedure used here is the typical Apache procedure: - create release candidate - ask PMC members to check the RC and vote on it - if vote passes, the release is complete It is not possible to create a release without the votes. I

Re: OpenNLP 1.6.0 RC 4 ready for testing

On 29.05.2015, at 17:49, Joern Kottmann kottm...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone else please download RC 4 and give it a try with your projects. We are happy about every bug we can avoid shipping. I locally and briefly tested DKPro Core against the OpenNLP RC 4 and hit no issues. Some API has changed

Re: Automated testing with public data

Since OpenNLP is cross-platform/Java-based, something that works cross-platform/Java-based might be better than wget. I'm using Ant scripts for such tasks. -- Richard On 29.04.2015, at 17:11, William Colen william.co...@gmail.com wrote: +1 The script would also be great for documentation.

Re: Automated testing with public data

On 15.04.2015, at 09:39, Joern Kottmann kottm...@gmail.com wrote: Some data sets are publicly available but protected by copyright and just can't be redistributed in anyway. For this data we could get/buy a license and maybe restrict access to it among the committers. That's what I'm saying

Re: Automated testing with public data

On 15.04.2015, at 10:23, Joern Kottmann kottm...@gmail.com wrote: With publicly accessible data I mean a corpus you can somehow acquire, opposed to the data you create on your own for a project. All the corpora we support in the formats package are publicly accessible. Maybe some you have

Re: OpenNLP 1.6.0 RC 2 ready for testing

be. Did you find an issue? 2015-01-22 21:20 GMT-02:00 Richard Eckart de Castilho richard.eck...@gmail.com: Hi, it is a pity that apparently apparently no existing models (1.5.0 up to 1.5.3) are supported anymore with version 1.6.0. Cheers, -- Richard On 22.01.2015, at 20:55

Re: OpenNLP 1.6.0 RC 2 ready for testing

Hi, it is a pity that apparently apparently no existing models (1.5.0 up to 1.5.3) are supported anymore with version 1.6.0. Cheers, -- Richard On 22.01.2015, at 20:55, William Colen william.co...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Our second release candidate is ready for testing. RC 1 failed to

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: OpenNLP » Apache OpenNLP UIMA Annotators #453

Hi everybody, I took the liberty to manually trigger this build after stumbling over a post on Stackoverflow pointing out that the current trunk version doesn't compile. Maybe somebody forgot to check in some files in the last commit? I also wonder why Jenkins didn't automatically build.

Re: Support for sequence models

Would it still be possible to use the current 1.5.x models with OpenNLP after the change? -- Richard On 20.01.2014, at 07:48, Jörn Kottmann kottm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, in OpenNLP we have a couple of components which rely on sequence tagging. Right now they are using a normal

Re: Host stock models in maven central

-- --- Richard Eckart de Castilho Technical Lead Ubiquitous Knowledge Processing Lab (UKP-TUD) FB 20 Computer Science Department Technische Universität Darmstadt Hochschulstr. 10, D-64289 Darmstadt, Germany phone [+49] (0)6151 16-7477, fax -5455, room