Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Would be a pleasure. Let's prepare the next OpenNLP RC and I create a PR with the update. 2017-05-16 14:36 GMT-03:00 Richard Eckart de Castilho : > 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
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
Hi Richard, I cloned DKPro code and tried Rodrigo proposed changes. Your test passes with it. Thank you William 2017-05-15 18:51 GMT-03:00 Rodrigo Agerri : > Hello Richard, > > I have tried with various corpora, including GUM, but I cannot reproduce > that error. > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/8a3b3b537a30b14c4ffb5eb32ffa41 > d5027bddad > > Please note that commit O-904 changed (broke) the lemmatizer API > substantially to make it uniform between DictionaryLemmatizer and the > LemmatizerME (e.g., doing the decoding of lemmas internally and so on) so > that this line for tagging with the LemmatizerME is not required: > > https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/89f144a63b214cd584b3cd0e6c499d > ff6cbcd9ca/dkpro-core-opennlp-asl/src/main/java/de/ > tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/opennlp/OpenNlpLemmatizer.java#L135 > > Also, that commit changed the LemmaSampleStream and LemmaSample classes, so > it is possible that is affecting this class: > > https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/89f144a63b214cd584b3cd0e6c499d > ff6cbcd9ca/dkpro-core-opennlp-asl/src/main/java/de/ > tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/opennlp/internal/CasLemmaSampleStream.java > > I understand the logic of this class correctly as it stands it will take an > already encoded SES and will try to encoded it again? > > Could you please take a look and see if that could be the problem? > > Cheers, > > Rodrigo > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho < > r...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > 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 test still behaves strange. > > > > Cheers, > > > > -- Richard > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Hello Richard, I have tried with various corpora, including GUM, but I cannot reproduce that error. https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/8a3b3b537a30b14c4ffb5eb32ffa41 d5027bddad Please note that commit O-904 changed (broke) the lemmatizer API substantially to make it uniform between DictionaryLemmatizer and the LemmatizerME (e.g., doing the decoding of lemmas internally and so on) so that this line for tagging with the LemmatizerME is not required: https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/89f144a63b214cd584b3cd0e6c499dff6cbcd9ca/dkpro-core-opennlp-asl/src/main/java/de/tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/opennlp/OpenNlpLemmatizer.java#L135 Also, that commit changed the LemmaSampleStream and LemmaSample classes, so it is possible that is affecting this class: https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/89f144a63b214cd584b3cd0e6c499dff6cbcd9ca/dkpro-core-opennlp-asl/src/main/java/de/tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/opennlp/internal/CasLemmaSampleStream.java I understand the logic of this class correctly as it stands it will take an already encoded SES and will try to encoded it again? Could you please take a look and see if that could be the problem? Cheers, Rodrigo On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > > 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 test still behaves strange. > > Cheers, > > -- Richard > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Good to hear, the parser eval test also had a bug (O-1060), we will fix this now as well before the next RC, this should prevent that this happens again. And thanks again for finding this! Now we need to find the problem with the lemmatizer before we can build the next RC. Jörn On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > > 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 test still behaves strange. > > 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 test still behaves strange. Cheers, -- Richard
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
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 Jörn On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > Hi Rodrigo, > > On 15.05.2017, at 15:36, Rodrigo Agerri wrote: > > > > I cannot reproduce the lemmatizer issue. Could you please share your > > training data? > > I have observed the change in behavior via the OpenNlpLemmatizerTrainerTest > in DKPro Core [1]. It happens when I change the OpenNLP version in the POM > from 1.7.2 to 1.8.0 (after including the OpenNLP staging Maven repo of > course). > Unfortunately, it's not a simple minimal OpenNLP-only unit test, but it > makes used > of the respective DKPro Core UIMA components. > > The data that is used is the GUM 3.0.0 corpus, specifically the CoNLL > files in it [2]. > > The corpus can be downloaded from: https://github.com/amir- > zeldes/gum/archive/V3.0.0.zip > > Cheers, > > -- Richard > > [1] https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/ > 89f144a63b214cd584b3cd0e6c499dff6cbcd9ca/dkpro-core-opennlp- > asl/src/test/java/de/tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/opennlp/ > OpenNlpLemmatizerTrainerTest.java > [2] https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/master/dkpro- > core-api-datasets-asl/src/main/resources/de/tudarmstadt/ > ukp/dkpro/core/api/datasets/lib/gum-en-conll-3.0.0.yaml
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Hi Rodrigo, On 15.05.2017, at 15:36, Rodrigo Agerri wrote: > > I cannot reproduce the lemmatizer issue. Could you please share your > training data? I have observed the change in behavior via the OpenNlpLemmatizerTrainerTest in DKPro Core [1]. It happens when I change the OpenNLP version in the POM from 1.7.2 to 1.8.0 (after including the OpenNLP staging Maven repo of course). Unfortunately, it's not a simple minimal OpenNLP-only unit test, but it makes used of the respective DKPro Core UIMA components. The data that is used is the GUM 3.0.0 corpus, specifically the CoNLL files in it [2]. The corpus can be downloaded from: https://github.com/amir-zeldes/gum/archive/V3.0.0.zip Cheers, -- Richard [1] https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/89f144a63b214cd584b3cd0e6c499dff6cbcd9ca/dkpro-core-opennlp-asl/src/test/java/de/tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/opennlp/OpenNlpLemmatizerTrainerTest.java [2] https://github.com/dkpro/dkpro-core/blob/master/dkpro-core-api-datasets-asl/src/main/resources/de/tudarmstadt/ukp/dkpro/core/api/datasets/lib/gum-en-conll-3.0.0.yaml
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Hello Richard, I cannot reproduce the lemmatizer issue. Could you please share your training data? Best regards, Rodrigo On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > > > On 13.05.2017, at 22:35, Richard Eckart de Castilho > wrote: > > > > Should OpenNLP 1.8.0 yield identical results as 1.7.2 when the same > > training data is used during training? > > > > I have a test that trains a lemmatizer model on GUM 3.0.0. With 1.7.2, > > this model reached an f-score of ~0.96. With 1.8.0, I only get ~0.84. > > Also, this test which trains and evaluates a lemmatizer model > takes ~8 sec with 1.7.2 and ~170 sec with 1.8.0. Even when only > considering the training phase (no evaluation), the test runs > much faster with 1.7.2 than with 1.8.0. > > Here are some details on the training phase. > > It seems odd that the events, outcomes, and predicates change that much. > > === 1.7.2 > > done. 50697 events > Indexing... done. > Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 12675. > Done indexing. > Incorporating indexed data for training... > done. > Number of Event Tokens: 12675 > Number of Outcomes: 389 > Number of Predicates: 13488 > ...done. > Computing model parameters ... > Performing 10 iterations. > 1: ... loglikelihood=-302335.58198350534 0.8420616604532812 > 2: ... loglikelihood=-61602.20311717376 0.9492672150225852 > 3: ... loglikelihood=-30747.954089148297 0.9769217113438665 > 4: ... loglikelihood=-19986.853691639506 0.9850484249561118 > 5: ... loglikelihood=-14672.523462458894 0.9881255301102629 > 6: ... loglikelihood=-11572.587093608756 0.9893879322247865 > 7: ... loglikelihood=-9571.242700030467 0.9900783083811665 > 8: ... loglikelihood=-8185.39402892 0.9906897844053889 > 9: ... loglikelihood=-7174.66904253965 0.9912223602974535 > 10: ... loglikelihood=-6407.42781438460.9917746612225575 > > > === 1.8.0 > > done. 50697 events > Indexing... done. > Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 26026. > Done indexing. > Incorporating indexed data for training... > done. > Number of Event Tokens: 26026 > Number of Outcomes: 7668 > Number of Predicates: 15279 > ...done. > Computing model parameters ... > Performing 10 iterations. > 1: ... loglikelihood=-453475.08854769287 1.972503303943034E-5 > 2: ... loglikelihood=-165718.68620632993 0.9509241177978973 > 3: ... loglikelihood=-85388.42871190465 0.9761327100222893 > 4: ... loglikelihood=-56404.00400621838 0.9892104069274316 > 5: ... loglikelihood=-41004.08840359108 0.9938457896916977 > 6: ... loglikelihood=-31539.64788603799 0.9955421425330887 > 7: ... loglikelihood=-25264.889481438582 0.9964889441189814 > 8: ... loglikelihood=-20883.72059438774 0.9972384953744797 > 9: ... loglikelihood=-17699.228362701586 0.9977710712665444 > 10: ... loglikelihood=-15306.654021266759 0.9980669467621358 > > > I also get some differences in f-score for other tests that train models, > but not as significant as when training a lemmatizer model. > > -- Richard >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
I now tested a version which doesn't have that change and that one is also broken, must have been caused by another commit. Jörn On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > Hi Jörn, > > unfortunately, I don't have a comprehensive unit test for the parser. > But from my perspective, it looks like there is something more serious > going on than just a bit of parse tree reordering when suddenly a > determiner (DT, "a") is tagged as a punctuation mark (, ","): > > 1.7.2: (ROOT (S (NP (PRP We)) (VP (VBP need) *!*(NP (NP (DT a)*!* (ADJP >(RB very) (VBN complicated)) (NN example) (NN sentence)) >(, ,) (SBAR (WHNP (WDT which)) (S (VP (VBZ contains) (PP >(IN as) (NP (NP (JJ many) (NNS constituents) (CC and) >(NNS dependencies)) (PP (IN as) (ADJP (JJ possible)) (. .))) > > 1.8.0: (ROOT (S (NP (PRP We)) (VP (VBP need) *!*(, a) (NP (NP*!* (ADJP >(RB very) (VBN complicated)) (NN example) (NN sentence)) >(, ,) (SBAR (WHNP (WDT which)) (S (VP (VBZ contains) (PP >(IN as) (NP (NP (JJ many) (NNS constituents) (CC and) >(NNS dependencies)) (PP (IN as) (ADJP (JJ possible)) (. .))) > > IMHO punctuation marks and closed word classes like determiners should be > pretty stable in their labels. There is usually no need for the parser to > invent a tag and the labels seen in the training data should be sufficient. > > Could there maybe be a problem with duplicates being dropped silently > by the move from the ListHeap to the TreeSet? If duplicate removal > is not important, then maybe sorting the heap after it has been filled > would be a better option than using a permanently sorted and de-duplicating > data structure. > > Cheers, > > -- Richard > > > On 15.05.2017, at 10:39, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > > > Hello Richard, > > > > thanks for reporting this. For 1.8.0 we replaced a Heap with a SortedSet > > [1]. In this commit there is one loop [2] which iterates through the > parses > > which will be advanced. The order of the Parsers in the Heap was not so > > well defined, therefore we decided to sort them by probability. > > We also noticed that this change is changing the output of the parser > with > > the existing models in our SourceForge model eval test [3]. > > > > After running the evaluation on the OntoNotes4 data set I only got very > > small change and decided it is ok to do this. I am not aware of how big > the > > change is but is was less than the delta in test case [4] of 0.001. > > > > What do you think? Should this be rolled back? > > > > Anyway, that said, about the parser, I still need to understand what > > happened with the lemmatizer. > > > > Jörn > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/3df659b9bfb02084e78 > 2f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c > > [2] > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/blob/3df659b9bfb02084e782f > 1e8b6ec716f56e0611c/opennlp-tools/src/main/java/opennlp/tools/parser/ > AbstractBottomUpParser.java#L285 > > [3] > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/3df659b9bfb02084e78 > 2f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c#diff-a5834f32b8a41b76a336126e4b13d4f7L349 > > [4] > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/blob/3df659b9bfb02084e782f > 1e8b6ec716f56e0611c/opennlp-tools/src/test/java/opennlp/ > tools/eval/OntoNotes4ParserEval.java#L70 > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Hi Jörn, unfortunately, I don't have a comprehensive unit test for the parser. But from my perspective, it looks like there is something more serious going on than just a bit of parse tree reordering when suddenly a determiner (DT, "a") is tagged as a punctuation mark (, ","): 1.7.2: (ROOT (S (NP (PRP We)) (VP (VBP need) *!*(NP (NP (DT a)*!* (ADJP (RB very) (VBN complicated)) (NN example) (NN sentence)) (, ,) (SBAR (WHNP (WDT which)) (S (VP (VBZ contains) (PP (IN as) (NP (NP (JJ many) (NNS constituents) (CC and) (NNS dependencies)) (PP (IN as) (ADJP (JJ possible)) (. .))) 1.8.0: (ROOT (S (NP (PRP We)) (VP (VBP need) *!*(, a) (NP (NP*!* (ADJP (RB very) (VBN complicated)) (NN example) (NN sentence)) (, ,) (SBAR (WHNP (WDT which)) (S (VP (VBZ contains) (PP (IN as) (NP (NP (JJ many) (NNS constituents) (CC and) (NNS dependencies)) (PP (IN as) (ADJP (JJ possible)) (. .))) IMHO punctuation marks and closed word classes like determiners should be pretty stable in their labels. There is usually no need for the parser to invent a tag and the labels seen in the training data should be sufficient. Could there maybe be a problem with duplicates being dropped silently by the move from the ListHeap to the TreeSet? If duplicate removal is not important, then maybe sorting the heap after it has been filled would be a better option than using a permanently sorted and de-duplicating data structure. Cheers, -- Richard > On 15.05.2017, at 10:39, Joern Kottmann wrote: > > Hello Richard, > > thanks for reporting this. For 1.8.0 we replaced a Heap with a SortedSet > [1]. In this commit there is one loop [2] which iterates through the parses > which will be advanced. The order of the Parsers in the Heap was not so > well defined, therefore we decided to sort them by probability. > We also noticed that this change is changing the output of the parser with > the existing models in our SourceForge model eval test [3]. > > After running the evaluation on the OntoNotes4 data set I only got very > small change and decided it is ok to do this. I am not aware of how big the > change is but is was less than the delta in test case [4] of 0.001. > > What do you think? Should this be rolled back? > > Anyway, that said, about the parser, I still need to understand what > happened with the lemmatizer. > > Jörn > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c > [2] > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/blob/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c/opennlp-tools/src/main/java/opennlp/tools/parser/AbstractBottomUpParser.java#L285 > [3] > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c#diff-a5834f32b8a41b76a336126e4b13d4f7L349 > [4] > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/blob/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c/opennlp-tools/src/test/java/opennlp/tools/eval/OntoNotes4ParserEval.java#L70
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Hello Richard, thanks for reporting this. For 1.8.0 we replaced a Heap with a SortedSet [1]. In this commit there is one loop [2] which iterates through the parses which will be advanced. The order of the Parsers in the Heap was not so well defined, therefore we decided to sort them by probability. We also noticed that this change is changing the output of the parser with the existing models in our SourceForge model eval test [3]. After running the evaluation on the OntoNotes4 data set I only got very small change and decided it is ok to do this. I am not aware of how big the change is but is was less than the delta in test case [4] of 0.001. What do you think? Should this be rolled back? Anyway, that said, about the parser, I still need to understand what happened with the lemmatizer. Jörn [1] https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c [2] https://github.com/apache/opennlp/blob/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c/opennlp-tools/src/main/java/opennlp/tools/parser/AbstractBottomUpParser.java#L285 [3] https://github.com/apache/opennlp/commit/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c#diff-a5834f32b8a41b76a336126e4b13d4f7L349 [4] https://github.com/apache/opennlp/blob/3df659b9bfb02084e782f1e8b6ec716f56e0611c/opennlp-tools/src/test/java/opennlp/tools/eval/OntoNotes4ParserEval.java#L70 On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 10:35 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > 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. the English parser model seems to create different POS tags now > for the sentence "We need a very complicated example sentence , > which contains as many constituents and dependencies as possible .". > "a" is now wrongly tagged as "," whereas 1.7.2 tagged it correctly as "DT". > > Should OpenNLP 1.8.0 yield identical results as 1.7.2 when the same > training data is used during training? > > I have a test that trains a lemmatizer model on GUM 3.0.0. With 1.7.2, > this model reached an f-score of ~0.96. With 1.8.0, I only get ~0.84. > > Cheers, > > -- Richard > > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
This vote is now cancelled, will push out another RC after fixing the reported issues -1 binding Sent from my iPhone > On May 13, 2017, at 8:44 PM, William Colen wrote: > > With the issues reported by Richard we should cancel the vote and rollback > the release. > > I change my vote to -1 (binding) > > 2017-05-13 19:08 GMT-03:00 Richard Eckart de Castilho : > >> >>> On 13.05.2017, at 22:35, Richard Eckart de Castilho >> wrote: >>> >>> Should OpenNLP 1.8.0 yield identical results as 1.7.2 when the same >>> training data is used during training? >>> >>> I have a test that trains a lemmatizer model on GUM 3.0.0. With 1.7.2, >>> this model reached an f-score of ~0.96. With 1.8.0, I only get ~0.84. >> >> Also, this test which trains and evaluates a lemmatizer model >> takes ~8 sec with 1.7.2 and ~170 sec with 1.8.0. Even when only >> considering the training phase (no evaluation), the test runs >> much faster with 1.7.2 than with 1.8.0. >> >> Here are some details on the training phase. >> >> It seems odd that the events, outcomes, and predicates change that much. >> >> === 1.7.2 >> >> done. 50697 events >>Indexing... done. >> Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 12675. >> Done indexing. >> Incorporating indexed data for training... >> done. >>Number of Event Tokens: 12675 >>Number of Outcomes: 389 >> Number of Predicates: 13488 >> ...done. >> Computing model parameters ... >> Performing 10 iterations. >> 1: ... loglikelihood=-302335.58198350534 0.8420616604532812 >> 2: ... loglikelihood=-61602.20311717376 0.9492672150225852 >> 3: ... loglikelihood=-30747.954089148297 0.9769217113438665 >> 4: ... loglikelihood=-19986.853691639506 0.9850484249561118 >> 5: ... loglikelihood=-14672.523462458894 0.9881255301102629 >> 6: ... loglikelihood=-11572.587093608756 0.9893879322247865 >> 7: ... loglikelihood=-9571.242700030467 0.9900783083811665 >> 8: ... loglikelihood=-8185.39402892 0.9906897844053889 >> 9: ... loglikelihood=-7174.66904253965 0.9912223602974535 >> 10: ... loglikelihood=-6407.42781438460.9917746612225575 >> >> >> === 1.8.0 >> >> done. 50697 events >>Indexing... done. >> Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 26026. >> Done indexing. >> Incorporating indexed data for training... >> done. >>Number of Event Tokens: 26026 >>Number of Outcomes: 7668 >> Number of Predicates: 15279 >> ...done. >> Computing model parameters ... >> Performing 10 iterations. >> 1: ... loglikelihood=-453475.08854769287 1.972503303943034E-5 >> 2: ... loglikelihood=-165718.68620632993 0.9509241177978973 >> 3: ... loglikelihood=-85388.42871190465 0.9761327100222893 >> 4: ... loglikelihood=-56404.00400621838 0.9892104069274316 >> 5: ... loglikelihood=-41004.08840359108 0.9938457896916977 >> 6: ... loglikelihood=-31539.64788603799 0.9955421425330887 >> 7: ... loglikelihood=-25264.889481438582 0.9964889441189814 >> 8: ... loglikelihood=-20883.72059438774 0.9972384953744797 >> 9: ... loglikelihood=-17699.228362701586 0.9977710712665444 >> 10: ... loglikelihood=-15306.654021266759 0.9980669467621358 >> >> >> I also get some differences in f-score for other tests that train models, >> but not as significant as when training a lemmatizer model. >> >> -- Richard >>
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
With the issues reported by Richard we should cancel the vote and rollback the release. I change my vote to -1 (binding) 2017-05-13 19:08 GMT-03:00 Richard Eckart de Castilho : > > > On 13.05.2017, at 22:35, Richard Eckart de Castilho > wrote: > > > > Should OpenNLP 1.8.0 yield identical results as 1.7.2 when the same > > training data is used during training? > > > > I have a test that trains a lemmatizer model on GUM 3.0.0. With 1.7.2, > > this model reached an f-score of ~0.96. With 1.8.0, I only get ~0.84. > > Also, this test which trains and evaluates a lemmatizer model > takes ~8 sec with 1.7.2 and ~170 sec with 1.8.0. Even when only > considering the training phase (no evaluation), the test runs > much faster with 1.7.2 than with 1.8.0. > > Here are some details on the training phase. > > It seems odd that the events, outcomes, and predicates change that much. > > === 1.7.2 > > done. 50697 events > Indexing... done. > Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 12675. > Done indexing. > Incorporating indexed data for training... > done. > Number of Event Tokens: 12675 > Number of Outcomes: 389 > Number of Predicates: 13488 > ...done. > Computing model parameters ... > Performing 10 iterations. > 1: ... loglikelihood=-302335.58198350534 0.8420616604532812 > 2: ... loglikelihood=-61602.20311717376 0.9492672150225852 > 3: ... loglikelihood=-30747.954089148297 0.9769217113438665 > 4: ... loglikelihood=-19986.853691639506 0.9850484249561118 > 5: ... loglikelihood=-14672.523462458894 0.9881255301102629 > 6: ... loglikelihood=-11572.587093608756 0.9893879322247865 > 7: ... loglikelihood=-9571.242700030467 0.9900783083811665 > 8: ... loglikelihood=-8185.39402892 0.9906897844053889 > 9: ... loglikelihood=-7174.66904253965 0.9912223602974535 > 10: ... loglikelihood=-6407.42781438460.9917746612225575 > > > === 1.8.0 > > done. 50697 events > Indexing... done. > Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 26026. > Done indexing. > Incorporating indexed data for training... > done. > Number of Event Tokens: 26026 > Number of Outcomes: 7668 > Number of Predicates: 15279 > ...done. > Computing model parameters ... > Performing 10 iterations. > 1: ... loglikelihood=-453475.08854769287 1.972503303943034E-5 > 2: ... loglikelihood=-165718.68620632993 0.9509241177978973 > 3: ... loglikelihood=-85388.42871190465 0.9761327100222893 > 4: ... loglikelihood=-56404.00400621838 0.9892104069274316 > 5: ... loglikelihood=-41004.08840359108 0.9938457896916977 > 6: ... loglikelihood=-31539.64788603799 0.9955421425330887 > 7: ... loglikelihood=-25264.889481438582 0.9964889441189814 > 8: ... loglikelihood=-20883.72059438774 0.9972384953744797 > 9: ... loglikelihood=-17699.228362701586 0.9977710712665444 > 10: ... loglikelihood=-15306.654021266759 0.9980669467621358 > > > I also get some differences in f-score for other tests that train models, > but not as significant as when training a lemmatizer model. > > -- Richard >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
> On 13.05.2017, at 22:35, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > > Should OpenNLP 1.8.0 yield identical results as 1.7.2 when the same > training data is used during training? > > I have a test that trains a lemmatizer model on GUM 3.0.0. With 1.7.2, > this model reached an f-score of ~0.96. With 1.8.0, I only get ~0.84. Also, this test which trains and evaluates a lemmatizer model takes ~8 sec with 1.7.2 and ~170 sec with 1.8.0. Even when only considering the training phase (no evaluation), the test runs much faster with 1.7.2 than with 1.8.0. Here are some details on the training phase. It seems odd that the events, outcomes, and predicates change that much. === 1.7.2 done. 50697 events Indexing... done. Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 12675. Done indexing. Incorporating indexed data for training... done. Number of Event Tokens: 12675 Number of Outcomes: 389 Number of Predicates: 13488 ...done. Computing model parameters ... Performing 10 iterations. 1: ... loglikelihood=-302335.58198350534 0.8420616604532812 2: ... loglikelihood=-61602.20311717376 0.9492672150225852 3: ... loglikelihood=-30747.954089148297 0.9769217113438665 4: ... loglikelihood=-19986.853691639506 0.9850484249561118 5: ... loglikelihood=-14672.523462458894 0.9881255301102629 6: ... loglikelihood=-11572.587093608756 0.9893879322247865 7: ... loglikelihood=-9571.242700030467 0.9900783083811665 8: ... loglikelihood=-8185.39402892 0.9906897844053889 9: ... loglikelihood=-7174.66904253965 0.9912223602974535 10: ... loglikelihood=-6407.42781438460.9917746612225575 === 1.8.0 done. 50697 events Indexing... done. Sorting and merging events... done. Reduced 50697 events to 26026. Done indexing. Incorporating indexed data for training... done. Number of Event Tokens: 26026 Number of Outcomes: 7668 Number of Predicates: 15279 ...done. Computing model parameters ... Performing 10 iterations. 1: ... loglikelihood=-453475.08854769287 1.972503303943034E-5 2: ... loglikelihood=-165718.68620632993 0.9509241177978973 3: ... loglikelihood=-85388.42871190465 0.9761327100222893 4: ... loglikelihood=-56404.00400621838 0.9892104069274316 5: ... loglikelihood=-41004.08840359108 0.9938457896916977 6: ... loglikelihood=-31539.64788603799 0.9955421425330887 7: ... loglikelihood=-25264.889481438582 0.9964889441189814 8: ... loglikelihood=-20883.72059438774 0.9972384953744797 9: ... loglikelihood=-17699.228362701586 0.9977710712665444 10: ... loglikelihood=-15306.654021266759 0.9980669467621358 I also get some differences in f-score for other tests that train models, but not as significant as when training a lemmatizer model. -- Richard
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. the English parser model seems to create different POS tags now for the sentence "We need a very complicated example sentence , which contains as many constituents and dependencies as possible .". "a" is now wrongly tagged as "," whereas 1.7.2 tagged it correctly as "DT". Should OpenNLP 1.8.0 yield identical results as 1.7.2 when the same training data is used during training? I have a test that trains a lemmatizer model on GUM 3.0.0. With 1.7.2, this model reached an f-score of ~0.96. With 1.8.0, I only get ~0.84. Cheers, -- Richard
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Unsubscribe On May 11, 2017 19:38, "Joern Kottmann" wrote: > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. > > The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ > > The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 > > To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or > opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml > file: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > 2 > > The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on > the Wiki here: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process > > The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained > issue list for details. > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. > > Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check > the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote > passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > Thanks! > > Jörn > > P.S. Here is my +1. >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
+1 non-biding Built and tests passing on macOS Sierra 10.12.4 From: Joern Kottmann Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 1:37 AM To: dev@opennlp.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2 The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 [https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/47359?v=3&s=400]<https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0> apache/opennlp<https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0> github.com opennlp - Mirror of Apache OpenNLP To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml file: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 2 The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on the Wiki here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained issue list for details. Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... Thanks! Jörn P.S. Here is my +1.
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
+1 non-binding Download artifacts, built and executed unit tests successfully on Mac OS X 10.10.5. On 2017/05/12 1:37, Joern Kottmann wrote: The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml file: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 2 The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on the Wiki here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained issue list for details. Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... Thanks! Jörn P.S. Here is my +1.
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
+1 binding Completed my evaluation on my external code. All tests passed. > On May 12, 2017, at 11:51 AM, William Colen wrote: > > +1 binding > Executed the complete evaluation suite, both in source distribution and the > git tag. Integrated and tested with other tools. > > > 2017-05-12 9:48 GMT-03:00 Joern Kottmann : > >> The vote is still open and we won't close it before the entire active PMC >> voted or the time passed. >> >> Jörn >> >> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Daniel Russ wrote: >> >>> Even though we have enough binding votes to release, can I have a few >> hours >>> to complete testing of my code with 1.8.0RC2 before release. >>> Daniel >>> >>> On May 11, 2017 12:38 PM, "Joern Kottmann" wrote: >>> The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ >> orgapacheopennlp-101 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml file: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ >> orgapacheopennlp-101 2 The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on the Wiki here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained issue list for details. Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... Thanks! Jörn P.S. Here is my +1. >>> >>
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
+1 binding Executed the complete evaluation suite, both in source distribution and the git tag. Integrated and tested with other tools. 2017-05-12 9:48 GMT-03:00 Joern Kottmann : > The vote is still open and we won't close it before the entire active PMC > voted or the time passed. > > Jörn > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Daniel Russ wrote: > > > Even though we have enough binding votes to release, can I have a few > hours > > to complete testing of my code with 1.8.0RC2 before release. > > Daniel > > > > On May 11, 2017 12:38 PM, "Joern Kottmann" wrote: > > > > > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > > > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. > > > > > > The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > orgapacheopennlp-101 > > > 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ > > > > > > The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at > > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 > > > > > > To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or > > > opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml > > > file: > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > orgapacheopennlp-101 > > > 2 > > > > > > The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on > > > the Wiki here: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process > > > > > > The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained > > > issue list for details. > > > > > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The > > > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. > > > > > > Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check > > > the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote > > > passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > > > > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 > > > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Jörn > > > > > > P.S. Here is my +1. > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
The vote is still open and we won't close it before the entire active PMC voted or the time passed. Jörn On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Daniel Russ wrote: > Even though we have enough binding votes to release, can I have a few hours > to complete testing of my code with 1.8.0RC2 before release. > Daniel > > On May 11, 2017 12:38 PM, "Joern Kottmann" wrote: > > > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. > > > > The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > > 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ > > > > The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 > > > > To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or > > opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml > > file: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > > 2 > > > > The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on > > the Wiki here: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process > > > > The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained > > issue list for details. > > > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The > > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. > > > > Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check > > the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote > > passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 > > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Jörn > > > > P.S. Here is my +1. > > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Even though we have enough binding votes to release, can I have a few hours to complete testing of my code with 1.8.0RC2 before release. Daniel On May 11, 2017 12:38 PM, "Joern Kottmann" wrote: > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. > > The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ > > The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 > > To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or > opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml > file: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > 2 > > The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on > the Wiki here: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process > > The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained > issue list for details. > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. > > Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check > the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote > passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > Thanks! > > Jörn > > P.S. Here is my +1. >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
+1 non-binding Built and tested on Ubuntu 16.04 and Amazon Linux 2017.03.0 with OpenJDK8. NOTICE and LICENSE files look good. Created and tested a token name finder model. On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > +1 (binding) > > - source distr build succeeds > - build from tag succeeds > - signatures and hashes ok > > Regards, > Tommaso > > Il giorno ven 12 mag 2017 alle ore 01:11 Suneel Marthi > > ha scritto: > > > +1 binding > > > > 1. Downloaded artifacts and ran thru a clean build - all unit tests pass > > 2. verified sigs and hashes > > > > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Joern Kottmann > > wrote: > > > > > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > > > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. > > > > > > The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > orgapacheopennlp-101 > > > 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ > > > > > > The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at > > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 > > > > > > To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or > > > opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml > > > file: > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > orgapacheopennlp-101 > > > 2 > > > > > > The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on > > > the Wiki here: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process > > > > > > The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained > > > issue list for details. > > > > > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The > > > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. > > > > > > Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check > > > the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote > > > passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > > > > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 > > > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Jörn > > > > > > P.S. Here is my +1. > > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
+1 (binding) - source distr build succeeds - build from tag succeeds - signatures and hashes ok Regards, Tommaso Il giorno ven 12 mag 2017 alle ore 01:11 Suneel Marthi ha scritto: > +1 binding > > 1. Downloaded artifacts and ran thru a clean build - all unit tests pass > 2. verified sigs and hashes > > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Joern Kottmann > wrote: > > > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. > > > > The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > > 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ > > > > The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 > > > > To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or > > opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml > > file: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > > 2 > > > > The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on > > the Wiki here: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process > > > > The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained > > issue list for details. > > > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The > > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. > > > > Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check > > the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote > > passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 > > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Jörn > > > > P.S. Here is my +1. > > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
+1 binding 1. Downloaded artifacts and ran thru a clean build - all unit tests pass 2. verified sigs and hashes On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Joern Kottmann wrote: > The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP > 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. > > The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ > > The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 > > To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or > opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml > file: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 > 2 > > The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on > the Wiki here: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process > > The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained > issue list for details. > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. > > Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check > the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote > passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > Thanks! > > Jörn > > P.S. Here is my +1. >
[VOTE] Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2
The Apache OpenNLP PMC would like to call for a Vote on Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 Release Candidate 2. The RC 2 distributables can be downloaded from here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 2/org/apache/opennlp/opennlp-distr/1.8.0/ The release was made from the Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 tag at https://github.com/apache/opennlp/tree/opennlp-1.8.0 To use it in a maven build set the version for opennlp-tools or opennlp-uima to 1.8.0 and add the following URL to your settings.xml file: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopennlp-101 2 The release was made using the OpenNLP release process, documented on the Wiki here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Release+Process The release contains quite some changes, please refer to the contained issue list for details. Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0. The vote is open for at least the next 72 hours. Only votes from OpenNLP PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to check the release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OpenNLP 1.8.0 [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... Thanks! Jörn P.S. Here is my +1.
