Re: Suitable naming for Nutchgora branch?
Hi Lewis, 2.1 is fine with me. This is assuming 2.x is a good naming scheme in the first place. I must say that since the move of Nutchgora from trunk to branch it's kind of odd that it's still referred to as 2.x. (For now that's okay I guess). Ferdy On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com wrote: Good Morning, Does anyone have a differing opinion on naming next development track for Nutchgora branch 2.1? Before I set and classify most issues it would be good to know. Thank you Lewis -- *Lewis*
Re: Suitable naming for Nutchgora branch?
I must say that since the move of Nutchgora from trunk to branch it's kind of odd that it's still referred to as 2.x. (For now that's okay I guess). Moving it from the trunk made a lot of sense and has been abundantly discussed on this list. We had one stable version which is actively maintained and currently used by most people (1.x) and an experimental one largely untested and used by a minority (2.x). Hopefully when nutchgora (for which 2.x is a better name indeed) has had a couple of releases and is used by a larger number of people it will naturally find its place as trunk but for now since most releases are based on 1.x I think the latter should remain the trunk Julien On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com wrote: Good Morning, Does anyone have a differing opinion on naming next development track for Nutchgora branch 2.1? Before I set and classify most issues it would be good to know. Thank you Lewis -- *Lewis* -- * *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/ http://www.digitalpebble.com http://twitter.com/digitalpebble
Re: Suitable naming for Nutchgora branch?
Hi Everyone, As you guys will have seen I've quickly polluted our dev list again (sorry!!!) with set and classify for 2.1. The open issues for 2.0 are ones which I think we could address within the 2.0 release. This is merely my opinion, based upon the assertion that they all contain patches which could be up for review. With the exception of NUTCH-879 which is pretty alarming. I'll test shortly. I'm now away to bed. Best Lewis On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: Hi Guys,
Re: Suitable naming for Nutchgora branch?
Great work Lewis, thanks! Cheers, Chris On Apr 25, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney wrote: Hi Everyone, As you guys will have seen I've quickly polluted our dev list again (sorry!!!) with set and classify for 2.1. The open issues for 2.0 are ones which I think we could address within the 2.0 release. This is merely my opinion, based upon the assertion that they all contain patches which could be up for review. With the exception of NUTCH-879 which is pretty alarming. I'll test shortly. I'm now away to bed. Best Lewis On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: Hi Guys, ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
