Troy, > That may be the key, "use Maven's plugin to assist in building and releasing". > James said, " the move to Apache's SVN was a big enough change that we > would wait to do the maven work until some following release (after 2.6)" If > what James thought was true then we would use the exact same build in 2.6. > However, is sounds like that's not true and the build process will change in > 2.6 at the same time as it changes over to be built from the SVN repository at > Apache.
No change here- This particular Bug Tracker item referred to a missing file to an old release dating back to ~8 months ago. I believe that is still the plan; Create a 2.6-incubating release that looks like what would have been in sourceforge (whatever zip/jar structure format that was in 2.x). See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-13 > So that's no problem if we have the time to put in for 2.6, great. But change > means design so doesn't the question remain, "What will be built?". We > don't want to assume what will come out. Maybe it's so simple everyone else > understands it. I was thinking that delivering to developers is easy because > there is no pre-build. They just download from SVN and away they go. What > about the zip file resulting from the > 2.6 build? What will be in there? Is it option F? Will the directory > structure in > the zip file match that of SVN? In 2.5 they do not match. Let's get the repo and a baseline version in Apache SVN up and running first- I'll ping infra again... once we have that, I think we can create whatever binary executable format that is agreed upon here since this will be a brand new major release with new org.apache name spaces (3.0-incubating?)... > > -----Original Message----- > From: ctakes-dev-return-300- > [email protected] > [mailto:ctakes-dev-return-300- > [email protected] > ] On Behalf Of Chen, Pei > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 4:08 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: cTAKES 2.6 - packaging of deliverable - was RE: [jira] [Closed] > (CTAKES-34) icTAKES.jar is missing from the .gz distributions > > Note: > Just in case you're curious, was actually planning to use Maven's plugin > (Shade and Release) to assist in building and releasing... > > In case you're interested, feel free to them check out: > http://maven.apache.org/plugins/index.html > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chen, Pei [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:02 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: cTAKES 2.6 - packaging of deliverable - was RE: [jira] [Closed] > (CTAKES-34) icTAKES.jar is missing from the .gz distributions > > Ditto +1 on separate jars, > But, I actually don't think there is any contention here. I believe this was > an > old SF ticket that was left behind. > Since, icTAKES.tar.gz doesn't exist anymore, I think this Jira is a moot > point in > my point of view so hence it was closed. > > Since we moved to Apache, I would strongly advise us to allow the person > who will be actually doing the work (to use Maven or not, etc.) the freedom > to make this decision. > > --Pei > > -----Original Message----- > From: Coarr, Matt [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 4:59 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: cTAKES 2.6 - packaging of deliverable - was RE: [jira] [Closed] > (CTAKES-34) icTAKES.jar is missing from the .gz distributions > > My vote is to continue in the direction of the previous vote -- one jar file > produced for each module. This will align the development (svn > trunk) work using either eclipse or the command line more closely with the > execution of the binary release (jar only) environment. > > This will also set us up for a smooth migration to maven. > > My $0.02, > Matt
