You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to photark-dev@incubator.apache.org by Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com> on 2011/05/15 19:14:59 UTC
Preferred version of face4j to use
Hi devs,
I have started working on implementing "face recognition" functionality to
PhotArk.
I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab more
functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will normally
prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest version
1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
Regards
--
Subash Chaturanga
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
Blog - http://subashsdm.blogspot.com/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/subash89
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Subash Chaturanga <
>> subashsdm@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hi devs,
>> >> >
>> >> > I have started working on implementing "face recognition"
>> functionality
>> >> to
>> >> > PhotArk.
>> >> > I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab
>> more
>> >> > functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
>> >> > But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will
>> normally
>> >> > prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest
>> version
>> >> > 1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
>>
>
Hi, I have decided to move to version 1.5.3. Here is the current update
regarding selecting a proper face4j version.
Initially I thought of going with face4j 1.5.1. But it was not available in
maven central repository. Thus as I requested face4j author has added
version 1.5.2 to the maven central. But there were some issues on that as
well. But now we have 1.5.3 available which has those bugs fixed. So I think
for our project we can go ahead with the version 1.5.3 as I have also tried
some sample codes to test it.
> >> >
>> >>
>> >> As long as it's somewhat stable for what we want, latest and greatest
>> is
>> >> fine.
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Great.. then I will go ahead with the latest 1.5.1, which seems good. If
>> > needed we can shift to 1.5.0 as there won't be many deprecated methods
>> or
>> > any conflicts.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> If you are already working on code, can we try to commit as often as
>> possible, and discuss high level design on the mailing list.
>>
>
> Sure Luciano, I will update the JIRA with the work I am doing.
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Luciano Resende
>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Subash Chaturanga
> Department of Computer Science & Engineering
> University of Moratuwa
> Sri Lanka
>
> Blog - http://subashsdm.blogspot.com/
> Twitter - http://twitter.com/subash89
>
>
>
--
Subash Chaturanga
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
Blog - http://subashsdm.blogspot.com/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/subash89
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Subash Chaturanga <
> subashsdm@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi devs,
> >> >
> >> > I have started working on implementing "face recognition"
> functionality
> >> to
> >> > PhotArk.
> >> > I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab
> more
> >> > functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
> >> > But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will normally
> >> > prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest
> version
> >> > 1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
> >> >
> >>
> >> As long as it's somewhat stable for what we want, latest and greatest is
> >> fine.
> >>
> >>
> > Great.. then I will go ahead with the latest 1.5.1, which seems good. If
> > needed we can shift to 1.5.0 as there won't be many deprecated methods or
> > any conflicts.
> >
> >
>
> If you are already working on code, can we try to commit as often as
> possible, and discuss high level design on the mailing list.
>
Sure Luciano, I will update the JIRA with the work I am doing.
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
Subash Chaturanga
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
Blog - http://subashsdm.blogspot.com/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/subash89
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Avdhesh Yadav <av...@avdheshyadav.com>wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Luciano Resende <
> luckbr1975@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Subash Chaturanga <
> > subashsdm@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > Hi devs,
> > >> >
> > >> > I have started working on implementing "face recognition"
> > functionality
> > >> to
> > >> > PhotArk.
> > >> > I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab
> > more
> > >> > functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
> > >> > But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will
> normally
> > >> > prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest
> > version
> > >> > 1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> As long as it's somewhat stable for what we want, latest and greatest
> is
> > >> fine.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Great.. then I will go ahead with the latest 1.5.1, which seems good.
> If
> > > needed we can shift to 1.5.0 as there won't be many deprecated methods
> or
> > > any conflicts.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > If you are already working on code, can we try to commit as often as
> > possible,
>
> Subash for which branch you are working on code..REST is not ready yet..So
> I
> suppose you are working on trunk for Face recognition.
>
Yes, I am working on trunk.
>
> > and discuss high level design on the mailing list.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luciano Resende
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> > http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Avdhesh Yadav
> http://www.avdheshyadav.com
> http://twitter.com/yadavavdhesh
>
--
Subash Chaturanga
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
Blog - http://subashsdm.blogspot.com/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/subash89
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Avdhesh Yadav <av...@avdheshyadav.com> wrote:
>
> Subash for which branch you are working on code..REST is not ready yet..So I
> suppose you are working on trunk for Face recognition.
>
What are the implications of doing this on the REST branch ? Otherwise
we won't ever make it move forward :)
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Avdhesh Yadav <av...@avdheshyadav.com>.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Subash Chaturanga <
> subashsdm@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi devs,
> >> >
> >> > I have started working on implementing "face recognition"
> functionality
> >> to
> >> > PhotArk.
> >> > I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab
> more
> >> > functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
> >> > But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will normally
> >> > prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest
> version
> >> > 1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
> >> >
> >>
> >> As long as it's somewhat stable for what we want, latest and greatest is
> >> fine.
> >>
> >>
> > Great.. then I will go ahead with the latest 1.5.1, which seems good. If
> > needed we can shift to 1.5.0 as there won't be many deprecated methods or
> > any conflicts.
> >
> >
>
> If you are already working on code, can we try to commit as often as
> possible,
Subash for which branch you are working on code..REST is not ready yet..So I
suppose you are working on trunk for Face recognition.
> and discuss high level design on the mailing list.
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
Avdhesh Yadav
http://www.avdheshyadav.com
http://twitter.com/yadavavdhesh
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi devs,
>> >
>> > I have started working on implementing "face recognition" functionality
>> to
>> > PhotArk.
>> > I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab more
>> > functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
>> > But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will normally
>> > prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest version
>> > 1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
>> >
>>
>> As long as it's somewhat stable for what we want, latest and greatest is
>> fine.
>>
>>
> Great.. then I will go ahead with the latest 1.5.1, which seems good. If
> needed we can shift to 1.5.0 as there won't be many deprecated methods or
> any conflicts.
>
>
If you are already working on code, can we try to commit as often as
possible, and discuss high level design on the mailing list.
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi devs,
> >
> > I have started working on implementing "face recognition" functionality
> to
> > PhotArk.
> > I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab more
> > functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
> > But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will normally
> > prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest version
> > 1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
> >
>
> As long as it's somewhat stable for what we want, latest and greatest is
> fine.
>
>
Great.. then I will go ahead with the latest 1.5.1, which seems good. If
needed we can shift to 1.5.0 as there won't be many deprecated methods or
any conflicts.
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
Subash Chaturanga
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
Blog - http://subashsdm.blogspot.com/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/subash89
Re: Preferred version of face4j to use
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Subash Chaturanga <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> I have started working on implementing "face recognition" functionality to
> PhotArk.
> I added face4j version 1.5.1 (which is the latest where we can grab more
> functionality from face4j) to photark pom.
> But there is also 1.5.0 available. What versions PhotArk will normally
> prefer to go ahead with for their 3rd party dependencies? latest version
> 1.5.1 or 1.5.0 ?
>
As long as it's somewhat stable for what we want, latest and greatest is fine.
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/