You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ctakes.apache.org by "Coarr, Matt" <mc...@mitre.org> on 2013/06/03 22:32:03 UTC
Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
future releases (3.1 and later)
Just to tie back to this, it sounds like it's ok to use java 7 features. Right?
Anything that works with ctakes using java 1.7 should work work with uima requiring at least 1.5 or 1.6. I know I've been running 1.7 for about a year or so.
(The reason I'm asking is a coworker is making some changes and would like to use named capturing groups in the java 7 regex support — http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/regex/Pattern.html#groupname )
A couple of my other favorite java7 features that I've used on non-ctakes projects:
* multicatch: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/catch-multiple.html
* autoclosable resources (aka "try-with-resources"): http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/try-with-resources.html
* concurrency utility enhancements (aka "fork-join"): http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/concurrency/changes7.html
Matt
From: <Chen>, Pei <Pe...@childrens.harvard.edu>>
Reply-To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>" <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
Date: Thursday, May 23, 2013 18:29
To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>" <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
Subject: RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and future releases (3.1 and later)
good idea...
FYI:
Opened to track this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-197
Historically, Java has been pretty good about backwards compatibility, but I think we should still test and verify (not just cTAKES, but our dependencies as well).
--Pei
Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and future
releases (3.1 and later)
Posted by Girivaraprasad Nambari <gi...@gmail.com>.
Troy raised valid point. I heard few issues with openJDK in other forums.
Don't know they still exists or not.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Bleeker, Troy C. <Bl...@mayo.edu>wrote:
> Once we get to stating in the cTAKES doc which Java versions are
> acceptable I think we should also talk about whether we have tested on the
> OpenJDK or Oracle's.
>
> Troy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev-return-1670-Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@ctakes.apache.org [mailto:
> dev-return-1670-Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@ctakes.apache.org] On Behalf Of
> Jörn Kottmann
> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 9:46 AM
> To: dev@ctakes.apache.org
> Subject: Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
> future releases (3.1 and later)
>
> On 06/04/2013 04:34 PM, Masanz, James J. wrote:
> > For reference: the UIMA 2.4.0 documentation [1] says "As of release
> 2.2.1, the UIMA SDK requires a Java 1.5 level (or later). ... The release
> has been tested with Java 5 and 6. It has been tested on mainly on Windows
> XP and Linux Intel 32bit platforms, with some testing on the MacOSX. Other
> platforms and JDK implementations will likely work, but have not been as
> significantly tested."
>
> I used UIMA 2.4.0 and Java 7 on Linux 64 bit for a while but did not run
> into any issues, probably things will just work.
>
> Jörn
>
RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
future releases (3.1 and later)
Posted by "Bleeker, Troy C." <Bl...@mayo.edu>.
Once we get to stating in the cTAKES doc which Java versions are acceptable I think we should also talk about whether we have tested on the OpenJDK or Oracle's.
Troy
-----Original Message-----
From: dev-return-1670-Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@ctakes.apache.org [mailto:dev-return-1670-Bleeker.Troy=mayo.edu@ctakes.apache.org] On Behalf Of Jörn Kottmann
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 9:46 AM
To: dev@ctakes.apache.org
Subject: Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and future releases (3.1 and later)
On 06/04/2013 04:34 PM, Masanz, James J. wrote:
> For reference: the UIMA 2.4.0 documentation [1] says "As of release 2.2.1, the UIMA SDK requires a Java 1.5 level (or later). ... The release has been tested with Java 5 and 6. It has been tested on mainly on Windows XP and Linux Intel 32bit platforms, with some testing on the MacOSX. Other platforms and JDK implementations will likely work, but have not been as significantly tested."
I used UIMA 2.4.0 and Java 7 on Linux 64 bit for a while but did not run into any issues, probably things will just work.
Jörn
Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and future
releases (3.1 and later)
Posted by Jörn Kottmann <ko...@gmail.com>.
On 06/04/2013 04:34 PM, Masanz, James J. wrote:
> For reference: the UIMA 2.4.0 documentation [1] says "As of release 2.2.1, the UIMA SDK requires a Java 1.5 level (or later). ... The release has been tested with Java 5 and 6. It has been tested on mainly on Windows XP and Linux Intel 32bit platforms, with some testing on the MacOSX. Other platforms and JDK implementations will likely work, but have not been as significantly tested."
I used UIMA 2.4.0 and Java 7 on Linux 64 bit for a while but did not run
into any issues, probably things will just work.
Jörn
RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
future releases (3.1 and later)
Posted by "Masanz, James J." <Ma...@mayo.edu>.
I think we should just dive in and plan on Java 1.7 for the 3.1 release. I am hoping it won't delay the release, but if it does delay the release, I think it will be worth it. I have been running cTAKES 3.0.0 with java7 occasionally and have not run into problems.
For reference: the UIMA 2.4.0 documentation [1] says "As of release 2.2.1, the UIMA SDK requires a Java 1.5 level (or later). ... The release has been tested with Java 5 and 6. It has been tested on mainly on Windows XP and Linux Intel 32bit platforms, with some testing on the MacOSX. Other platforms and JDK implementations will likely work, but have not been as significantly tested."
Pei, when you wrote "still test and verify (not just cTAKES, but our dependencies as well)" did you have a specific plan in mind for testing our dependencies other than testing them indirectly by testing cTAKES (by running the cTAKES regression tests etc)
[1] http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/overview_and_setup.html#ugr.faqs.levels_required
-- James
-----Original Message-----
From: dev-return-1665-Masanz.James=mayo.edu@ctakes.apache.org [mailto:dev-return-1665-Masanz.James=mayo.edu@ctakes.apache.org] On Behalf Of Chen, Pei
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 3:42 PM
To: dev@ctakes.apache.org
Subject: RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and future releases (3.1 and later)
I believe so; do you know which component you were planning to require the java 1.7 features? (existing component or new?)
The one consideration is that if 3.1 is planned to be cut from trunk and released soon (end of this month?), it may be a good idea to isolate the project first (such as sandbox if it's a new component or a temp branch); just in case there isn't enough time or issues with 1.7 testing. My initial 2 cents...
--Pei
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Coarr, Matt [mailto:mcoarr@mitre.org]
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 4:33 PM
> To: dev@ctakes.apache.org
> Subject: Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
> future releases (3.1 and later)
>
> Just to tie back to this, it sounds like it's ok to use java 7 features. Right?
>
> Anything that works with ctakes using java 1.7 should work with uima
> requiring at least 1.5 or 1.6. I know I've been running 1.7 for about a year or
> so.
>
> (The reason I'm asking is a coworker is making some changes and would like
> to use named capturing groups in the java 7 regex support —
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/regex/Pattern.html#gro
> upname )
>
> A couple of my other favorite java7 features that I've used on non-ctakes
> projects:
>
> * multicatch:
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/catch-
> multiple.html
> * autoclosable resources (aka "try-with-resources"):
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/try-with-
> resources.html
> * concurrency utility enhancements (aka "fork-join"):
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/concurrency/chang
> es7.html
>
> Matt
>
>
> From: <Chen>, Pei
> <Pe...@childrens.harvard.edu>
> >
> Reply-To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>"
> <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
> Date: Thursday, May 23, 2013 18:29
> To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>"
> <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
> Subject: RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
> future releases (3.1 and later)
>
> good idea...
> FYI:
> Opened to track this:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-197
> Historically, Java has been pretty good about backwards compatibility, but I
> think we should still test and verify (not just cTAKES, but our dependencies
> as well).
>
> --Pei
Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
future releases (3.1 and later)
Posted by "Coarr, Matt" <mc...@mitre.org>.
I'll make sure it goes on a branch for now. The changes are for ctakes-assertion-zoner.
From: <Chen>, Pei <Pe...@childrens.harvard.edu>>
Reply-To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>" <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
Date: Monday, June 3, 2013 16:41
To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>" <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
Subject: RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and future releases (3.1 and later)
I believe so; do you know which component you were planning to require the java 1.7 features? (existing component or new?)
The one consideration is that if 3.1 is planned to be cut from trunk and released soon (end of this month?), it may be a good idea to isolate the project first (such as sandbox if it's a new component or a temp branch); just in case there isn't enough time or issues with 1.7 testing. My initial 2 cents...
--Pei
RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
future releases (3.1 and later)
Posted by "Chen, Pei" <Pe...@childrens.harvard.edu>.
I believe so; do you know which component you were planning to require the java 1.7 features? (existing component or new?)
The one consideration is that if 3.1 is planned to be cut from trunk and released soon (end of this month?), it may be a good idea to isolate the project first (such as sandbox if it's a new component or a temp branch); just in case there isn't enough time or issues with 1.7 testing. My initial 2 cents...
--Pei
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Coarr, Matt [mailto:mcoarr@mitre.org]
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 4:33 PM
> To: dev@ctakes.apache.org
> Subject: Re: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
> future releases (3.1 and later)
>
> Just to tie back to this, it sounds like it's ok to use java 7 features. Right?
>
> Anything that works with ctakes using java 1.7 should work work with uima
> requiring at least 1.5 or 1.6. I know I've been running 1.7 for about a year or
> so.
>
> (The reason I'm asking is a coworker is making some changes and would like
> to use named capturing groups in the java 7 regex support —
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/regex/Pattern.html#gro
> upname )
>
> A couple of my other favorite java7 features that I've used on non-ctakes
> projects:
>
> * multicatch:
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/catch-
> multiple.html
> * autoclosable resources (aka "try-with-resources"):
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/try-with-
> resources.html
> * concurrency utility enhancements (aka "fork-join"):
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/concurrency/chang
> es7.html
>
> Matt
>
>
> From: <Chen>, Pei
> <Pe...@childrens.harvard.edu>
> >
> Reply-To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>"
> <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
> Date: Thursday, May 23, 2013 18:29
> To: "dev@ctakes.apache.org<ma...@ctakes.apache.org>"
> <de...@ctakes.apache.org>>
> Subject: RE: supported java releases in current ctakes development and
> future releases (3.1 and later)
>
> good idea...
> FYI:
> Opened to track this:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-197
> Historically, Java has been pretty good about backwards compatibility, but I
> think we should still test and verify (not just cTAKES, but our dependencies
> as well).
>
> --Pei