Hi thanks for the feedback. I think we should go for (2) renaming the engine. First because the current name (KeywordExtractionEngine) is anyway not so fitting. Keyword extraction is typically more related to finding central words within a text but the engine is more about linking words with a vocabulary. Second because there might be some use cases where it would still make sense to use the old engine in parallel with the new one - e.g for extracting Product-Ids, ISBN numbers, chemical formulas such as CH3CH2OH ... Third it is easier to adapt the documentation - especially the usage scenarios - if there is a new name for the new engine and finally I do also like to have warnings instead of errors for users that have not yet adapted to the new engine.
While Fabians suggestion would clearly document the change it would still mean to break most current Stanbol installations as most of the users currently use the trunk version. However as soon as we do have a faster release cycle this option would be much more attractive. I would than suggest to use "EntityhubLinkingEngine" as the new name for the Engine as this name makes it very clear what this engine does. Thanks for the feedback best Rupert On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Fabian Christ > <christ.fab...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> ...what about creating a branch from the trunk with the current version >> (before the merge) that is known to be working? People could switch to that >> branch to keep the status quo and we should make clear that this branch >> will not be maintained in the future... > > I'd make that just a BEFORE_740 tag then - that makes it clearer that > this is not supposed to evolve further. > > -Bertrand -- | Rupert Westenthaler rupert.westentha...@gmail.com | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 | A-5500 Bischofshofen
