To me, the "SDK" has a meaning of adding tools, examples, etc. to a core
thing.  Using it as a top-level collection name for the various
framework implementations seems a bit "off".

I agree with that meaning of SDK, but seem to have come to the
opposite conclusion. :)  What I was proposing as uima-sdk does break
down into uimaj-core, uimaj-tools and uimaj-examples, among other
things.  It really does capture the whole SDK.


I think our big code bases (Java, C++, maybe others in the future - e.g.
C#, javaScript) could go into their own top-level things.  One criteria
to balance here is independence of releases.  Each top level thing might
reasonably be assumed to be release independent from other top level
things. This isn't quite true with C++ and Java - they often have some
(weak) dependencies due to naming issues, usually.

I'm not quite getting why Java-C++ have a tighter coupling than
Java-C# might have.

I do agree that the deciding factor should be whether these code bases
are released as one.  A related question would be whether they have
the same version number.  In the past our C++ version numbers have not
been in sync with our Java version numbers, but I don't think we were
ever entirely happy with that.  Maybe a tighter synchronization of
releases would be a good thing.

-Adam

Reply via email to