You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@uima.apache.org by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> on 2016/01/29 11:25:04 UTC

[VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Hi,

the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.

Changes rc2 -> rc3:
- UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
literal string expression matcher
- UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
generic feature expression

Changes rc1 -> rc2:
- UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher

General information:
This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
- Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
- Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
- Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
- Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
- New action for splitting annotations
- New block for resetting match context
- Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
- Many, many bug fixes and other improvements

Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/

SVN tag:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0

Update site:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/

Archive with all sources:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip

Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
"Cannot Reproduce").
They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.

... and here:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC

Please vote on release:

[ ] +1 OK to release
[ ]  0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...

Thanks.

Peter

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
source / svn compare - OK
build from sources - OK.  There are quite a few Java 8 javadoc warnings, but
that's not a blocker.

installed the eclipse update site built from sources into Eclipse 4.5 - OK; 
made new Ruta project - OK, show Ruta perspective - OK

issues fixed -ok

release notes, readme - OK

docbook output looks OK - both html and pdf

license / notice check - no changes from 2.3.1.  Spot check - OK

Noted one testcase accidentally ignored - I won't call this a blocker.

Noted one maven test failed due to known maven issue

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5792

Easy workaround - copying the mvn.cmd script to mvn.bat.  I won't call this a blocker either.

[X] +1 OK to release

-Marshall


On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>
> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
> literal string expression matcher
> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
> generic feature expression
>
> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>
> General information:
> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
> - New action for splitting annotations
> - New block for resetting match context
> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>
> Update site:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>
> Archive with all sources:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>
> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
> "Cannot Reproduce").
> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>
> ... and here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ]  0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
I'd assume adding 

    <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
    <artifactId>maven-invoker-plugin</artifactId>
    <version>2.0.0</version>

to the plugins management section of a suitable POM.

-- Richard

> On 01.02.2016, at 16:22, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5792
> 
> Unclear from this what a workaround is...
> 
> On 2/1/2016 10:04 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> I'm having a "build-from-sources" problem.  The build for project
>> "ruta-maven-plugin" when running the integration-test tries to invoke maven
>> using my installed maven 3.3.3 but using the call (on my windows machine):
>> 
>>   ...\apache-maven-3.3.3\bin\mvn.bat
>> 
>> and the bin directory for maven doesn't have a mvn.bat - it has a mvn.cmd.  So
>> it fails.
>> 
>> Not sure where this is coming from... 
>> 
>> -Marshall
>> 
>> 
>> On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>> 
>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>> literal string expression matcher
>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>> generic feature expression
>>> 
>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>> 
>>> General information:
>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>> 
>>> Staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>> 
>>> SVN tag:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>> 
>>> Update site:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>> 
>>> Archive with all sources:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>> 
>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>> 
>>> ... and here:
>>> 
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>> 
>>> Please vote on release:
>>> 
>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> Peter
>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
I will upgrade the version of the invoker-plugin.

Best,

Peter

Am 01.02.2016 um 16:25 schrieb Marshall Schor:
> workaround: in the maven bin/ directory, copy mvn.cmd -> mvn.bat :-)  Seems to work.
>
> -Marshall
>
> On 2/1/2016 10:22 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5792
>>
>> Unclear from this what a workaround is...
>>
>> On 2/1/2016 10:04 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>> I'm having a "build-from-sources" problem.  The build for project
>>> "ruta-maven-plugin" when running the integration-test tries to invoke maven
>>> using my installed maven 3.3.3 but using the call (on my windows machine):
>>>
>>>     ...\apache-maven-3.3.3\bin\mvn.bat
>>>
>>> and the bin directory for maven doesn't have a mvn.bat - it has a mvn.cmd.  So
>>> it fails.
>>>
>>> Not sure where this is coming from...
>>>
>>> -Marshall
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>>>
>>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>>> literal string expression matcher
>>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>>> generic feature expression
>>>>
>>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>>>
>>>> General information:
>>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>>>
>>>> Staging repository:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>>>
>>>> SVN tag:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>>>
>>>> Update site:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>>>
>>>> Archive with all sources:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>>>
>>>> ... and here:
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on release:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
workaround: in the maven bin/ directory, copy mvn.cmd -> mvn.bat :-)  Seems to work.

-Marshall

On 2/1/2016 10:22 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5792
>
> Unclear from this what a workaround is...
>
> On 2/1/2016 10:04 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> I'm having a "build-from-sources" problem.  The build for project
>> "ruta-maven-plugin" when running the integration-test tries to invoke maven
>> using my installed maven 3.3.3 but using the call (on my windows machine):
>>
>>    ...\apache-maven-3.3.3\bin\mvn.bat
>>
>> and the bin directory for maven doesn't have a mvn.bat - it has a mvn.cmd.  So
>> it fails.
>>
>> Not sure where this is coming from... 
>>
>> -Marshall
>>
>>
>> On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>>
>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>> literal string expression matcher
>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>> generic feature expression
>>>
>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>>
>>> General information:
>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>>
>>> Staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>>
>>> SVN tag:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>>
>>> Update site:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>>
>>> Archive with all sources:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>>
>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>>
>>> ... and here:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>>
>>> Please vote on release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-5792

Unclear from this what a workaround is...

On 2/1/2016 10:04 AM, Marshall Schor wrote:
> I'm having a "build-from-sources" problem.  The build for project
> "ruta-maven-plugin" when running the integration-test tries to invoke maven
> using my installed maven 3.3.3 but using the call (on my windows machine):
>
>    ...\apache-maven-3.3.3\bin\mvn.bat
>
> and the bin directory for maven doesn't have a mvn.bat - it has a mvn.cmd.  So
> it fails.
>
> Not sure where this is coming from... 
>
> -Marshall
>
>
> On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>
>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>> literal string expression matcher
>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>> generic feature expression
>>
>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>
>> General information:
>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>> - New action for splitting annotations
>> - New block for resetting match context
>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>
>> SVN tag:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>
>> Update site:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>
>> Archive with all sources:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>
>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>
>> ... and here:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>
>> Please vote on release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
I'm having a "build-from-sources" problem.  The build for project
"ruta-maven-plugin" when running the integration-test tries to invoke maven
using my installed maven 3.3.3 but using the call (on my windows machine):

   ...\apache-maven-3.3.3\bin\mvn.bat

and the bin directory for maven doesn't have a mvn.bat - it has a mvn.cmd.  So
it fails.

Not sure where this is coming from... 

-Marshall


On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>
> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
> literal string expression matcher
> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
> generic feature expression
>
> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>
> General information:
> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
> - New action for splitting annotations
> - New block for resetting match context
> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>
> Update site:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>
> Archive with all sources:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>
> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
> "Cannot Reproduce").
> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>
> ... and here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ]  0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
Thanks, I'll create an issue for checking these files. They are
somewhere between required and convenient, but it should at least be
consistent.

Best,

Peter

Am 14.02.2016 um 22:22 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
> tl;dr: no blockers: +1 for release 
>
> Continued:
>
> building from SVN tag with clean Maven repo: OK
>
> installed Ruta from staged update site into Eclipse Mars: OK
>
> signature spot check on staging repository: OK
>
> release notes and issues fixed: look OK
>
> issues link: doesn't work but is not part of release ;)
> - I get "The requested filter doesn't exist or is private." when I try to access your Jira issues link below
>
> compared SVN and ZIP: odd but not blocker
>
> Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/GermanNovels: .classpath
> Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/GermanNovels: .project
> Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/Misc: .project
> Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/ruta-tutorial-GermanNovels: .project
>
> If the Eclipse build metadata (.project, .classpath) files are in SVN, then I suppose they should also be in the source ZIP.
> These settings appear to be important for the proper functioning of the example projects - otherwise I would expect they also wouldn't be in SVN.
>
> When I try to "Import->Existing projects" on the example projects folder from the sources ZIP, I get:
>
> - ExampleProject
> - ExtensionsExample
> - TextRulerExample
>
> Using "Import->Existing Maven projects", I get
>
> - GermanNovels
> - ruta-ep-example-extensions
> - ruta-maven-example
>
> I never get
>
> - Misc
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Richard
>
>> On 07.02.2016, at 19:52, Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Checks:
>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>
>> Questions:
>> - several files in the GermanNovels resources have the first word duplicated, they also start with a BOM - necessary?
>> - is it necessary that the GermanNovels example contains GeneratedDKPRoCoreTypes.xml - can these not be obtained through Maven? If it is necessary, provenance information would be good.
>>
>> Comments:
>> - tutorial-GermanNovels.tex is written in German, not English. 
>>
>> So much so far.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -- Richard
>>
>>> On 29.01.2016, at 11:25, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>>
>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>> literal string expression matcher
>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>> generic feature expression
>>>
>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>>
>>> General information:
>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>>
>>> Staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>>
>>> SVN tag:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>>
>>> Update site:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>>
>>> Archive with all sources:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>>
>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>>
>>> ... and here:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>>
>>> Please vote on release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Peter

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
tl;dr: no blockers: +1 for release 

Continued:

building from SVN tag with clean Maven repo: OK

installed Ruta from staged update site into Eclipse Mars: OK

signature spot check on staging repository: OK

release notes and issues fixed: look OK

issues link: doesn't work but is not part of release ;)
- I get "The requested filter doesn't exist or is private." when I try to access your Jira issues link below

compared SVN and ZIP: odd but not blocker

Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/GermanNovels: .classpath
Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/GermanNovels: .project
Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/Misc: .project
Only in ruta-2.4.0-svn/example-projects/ruta-tutorial-GermanNovels: .project

If the Eclipse build metadata (.project, .classpath) files are in SVN, then I suppose they should also be in the source ZIP.
These settings appear to be important for the proper functioning of the example projects - otherwise I would expect they also wouldn't be in SVN.

When I try to "Import->Existing projects" on the example projects folder from the sources ZIP, I get:

- ExampleProject
- ExtensionsExample
- TextRulerExample

Using "Import->Existing Maven projects", I get

- GermanNovels
- ruta-ep-example-extensions
- ruta-maven-example

I never get

- Misc


Cheers,

-- Richard

> On 07.02.2016, at 19:52, Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Checks:
> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
> 
> Questions:
> - several files in the GermanNovels resources have the first word duplicated, they also start with a BOM - necessary?
> - is it necessary that the GermanNovels example contains GeneratedDKPRoCoreTypes.xml - can these not be obtained through Maven? If it is necessary, provenance information would be good.
> 
> Comments:
> - tutorial-GermanNovels.tex is written in German, not English. 
> 
> So much so far.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -- Richard
> 
>> On 29.01.2016, at 11:25, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>> 
>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>> literal string expression matcher
>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>> generic feature expression
>> 
>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>> 
>> General information:
>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>> - New action for splitting annotations
>> - New block for resetting match context
>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>> 
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>> 
>> SVN tag:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>> 
>> Update site:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>> 
>> Archive with all sources:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>> 
>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>> 
>> ... and here:
>> 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>> 
>> Please vote on release:
>> 
>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Peter
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
I think Peter dug up the issue number :-)

-M

On 2/8/2016 4:26 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
> The problem I see is that we currently do not know where the file comes from
> (provenance). I find it hard to believe that the file was an original creation
> from Stefan. I believe that it could take quite some time to compile such a
> list of names. More likely is in my opinion, that the file was obtained from
> some third-party source. 
>
> If we knew that third-party source, we might easily be able to clear IP.
>
> Since we do not know it, we currently have to resort to speculation about the
> lawfulness of compiling specialized unigram lists.
>
> It looks like we can agree this is not a blocker for the present release as
> involved risk is apparently very low. Still, we should try to clear this.
>
> I've placed a comment on UIMA-3926 asking Stefan to shed some light on the
> provenance of the file. Let's see what comes of it.
>
> Thanks for digging up the issue number Marschall!
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Richard
>
>> On 08.02.2016, at 21:56, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, first I'd like to summarize, in case I don't fully understand the issue.
>>
>> Ruta contains some examples; the example data include 90K file FirstNames.txt,
>> in example-projects/GermanNovels/reosources.
>>
>> From what I can see, there are no actual German Novels included in the
>> example-project/GermanNovels.
>>
>> From the discussion, it seems the word lists were not originally part of the
>> contribution; but a comment in UIMA-3926 Peter asks if the word list could be
>> contributed, but not the novels, and Stefan then contributed them.
>>
>> I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion, but I did a quick internet
>> search and believe that compiling a list of words used in a novel does not
>> infringe the copyright in that novel, because this data is entirely independent
>> of the expressive value of any of the underlying sources that might have been
>> used to compile the list; and the list has lost any similarity to the underlying
>> sources in terms of things like plot, theme, etc.
>>
>> So I think the risk is low.  We could probably reduce the risk by asking Stephan
>> where these lists came from, and if he is aware of any IP issues with them.
>>
>> To the extent that we collect information and form opinions on issues like this,
>> I recommend adding a file to the SVN, not necessarily included in the build,
>> called something like license-notice-research.txt, just to record these things
>> in one place, so we can find it quickly if a question comes up later and we want
>> to remember what and why we did something.
>>
>> -Marshall
>>
>>
>> On 2/8/2016 5:21 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>> On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>>> Checks:
>>>>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>>>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>>>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>>>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>>>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>>>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>>>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>>>>> problematic.
>>>>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>>>>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>>>>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>>>>> to the names needed for the example.
>>>> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
>>>> there is no original source file with a specific license.
>>>>
>>>> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
>>>> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
>>>> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
>>>> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
>>>> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?
>>> Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.
>>>
>>> -- Richard
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
Ok, I'll proceed with the review process then.

-- Richard

> On 09.02.2016, at 16:32, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree with this analysis; I think this is minimal risk.
> 
> -Marshall
> 
> On 2/9/2016 4:24 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>> He crawled it from this site [1] and then he modified the result by
>> removing entries or single letters.
>> 
>> I do not see any license notice. Is this a good or bad sign for us?
>> 
>> IANAL (and actually do not know much about it) but I would assume that
>> it is not problematic. There is no specific source file and the owner
>> probably cannot call copyright for single firstnames.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Peter
>> 
>> [1] http://www.vornamen-liste.de/
>> 
>> Am 09.02.2016 um 10:17 schrieb Peter Klügl:
>>> I additionally sent an email to the last address I know.
>>> 
>>> Am 08.02.2016 um 22:26 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>> The problem I see is that we currently do not know where the file comes from
>>>> (provenance). I find it hard to believe that the file was an original creation
>>>> from Stefan. I believe that it could take quite some time to compile such a
>>>> list of names. More likely is in my opinion, that the file was obtained from
>>>> some third-party source. 
>>>> 
>>>> If we knew that third-party source, we might easily be able to clear IP.
>>>> 
>>>> Since we do not know it, we currently have to resort to speculation about the
>>>> lawfulness of compiling specialized unigram lists.
>>>> 
>>>> It looks like we can agree this is not a blocker for the present release as
>>>> involved risk is apparently very low. Still, we should try to clear this.
>>>> 
>>>> I've placed a comment on UIMA-3926 asking Stefan to shed some light on the
>>>> provenance of the file. Let's see what comes of it.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for digging up the issue number Marschall!
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> 
>>>> -- Richard
>>>> 
>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 21:56, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> So, first I'd like to summarize, in case I don't fully understand the issue.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ruta contains some examples; the example data include 90K file FirstNames.txt,
>>>>> in example-projects/GermanNovels/reosources.
>>>>> 
>>>>> From what I can see, there are no actual German Novels included in the
>>>>> example-project/GermanNovels.
>>>>> 
>>>>> From the discussion, it seems the word lists were not originally part of the
>>>>> contribution; but a comment in UIMA-3926 Peter asks if the word list could be
>>>>> contributed, but not the novels, and Stefan then contributed them.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion, but I did a quick internet
>>>>> search and believe that compiling a list of words used in a novel does not
>>>>> infringe the copyright in that novel, because this data is entirely independent
>>>>> of the expressive value of any of the underlying sources that might have been
>>>>> used to compile the list; and the list has lost any similarity to the underlying
>>>>> sources in terms of things like plot, theme, etc.
>>>>> 
>>>>> So I think the risk is low.  We could probably reduce the risk by asking Stephan
>>>>> where these lists came from, and if he is aware of any IP issues with them.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To the extent that we collect information and form opinions on issues like this,
>>>>> I recommend adding a file to the SVN, not necessarily included in the build,
>>>>> called something like license-notice-research.txt, just to record these things
>>>>> in one place, so we can find it quickly if a question comes up later and we want
>>>>> to remember what and why we did something.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Marshall
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 2/8/2016 5:21 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>>>>>> Checks:
>>>>>>>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>>>>>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>>>>>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>>>>>>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>>>>>>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>>>>>>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>>>>>>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>>>>>>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>>>>>>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>>>>>>>> problematic.
>>>>>>>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>>>>>>>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>>>>>>>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>>>>>>>> to the names needed for the example.
>>>>>>> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
>>>>>>> there is no original source file with a specific license.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
>>>>>>> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
>>>>>>> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
>>>>>>> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
>>>>>>> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?
>>>>>> Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- Richard
>> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
I agree with this analysis; I think this is minimal risk.

-Marshall

On 2/9/2016 4:24 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> He crawled it from this site [1] and then he modified the result by
> removing entries or single letters.
>
> I do not see any license notice. Is this a good or bad sign for us?
>
> IANAL (and actually do not know much about it) but I would assume that
> it is not problematic. There is no specific source file and the owner
> probably cannot call copyright for single firstnames.
>
> Best,
>
> Peter
>
> [1] http://www.vornamen-liste.de/
>
> Am 09.02.2016 um 10:17 schrieb Peter Klügl:
>> I additionally sent an email to the last address I know.
>>
>> Am 08.02.2016 um 22:26 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>> The problem I see is that we currently do not know where the file comes from
>>> (provenance). I find it hard to believe that the file was an original creation
>>> from Stefan. I believe that it could take quite some time to compile such a
>>> list of names. More likely is in my opinion, that the file was obtained from
>>> some third-party source. 
>>>
>>> If we knew that third-party source, we might easily be able to clear IP.
>>>
>>> Since we do not know it, we currently have to resort to speculation about the
>>> lawfulness of compiling specialized unigram lists.
>>>
>>> It looks like we can agree this is not a blocker for the present release as
>>> involved risk is apparently very low. Still, we should try to clear this.
>>>
>>> I've placed a comment on UIMA-3926 asking Stefan to shed some light on the
>>> provenance of the file. Let's see what comes of it.
>>>
>>> Thanks for digging up the issue number Marschall!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> -- Richard
>>>
>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 21:56, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So, first I'd like to summarize, in case I don't fully understand the issue.
>>>>
>>>> Ruta contains some examples; the example data include 90K file FirstNames.txt,
>>>> in example-projects/GermanNovels/reosources.
>>>>
>>>> From what I can see, there are no actual German Novels included in the
>>>> example-project/GermanNovels.
>>>>
>>>> From the discussion, it seems the word lists were not originally part of the
>>>> contribution; but a comment in UIMA-3926 Peter asks if the word list could be
>>>> contributed, but not the novels, and Stefan then contributed them.
>>>>
>>>> I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion, but I did a quick internet
>>>> search and believe that compiling a list of words used in a novel does not
>>>> infringe the copyright in that novel, because this data is entirely independent
>>>> of the expressive value of any of the underlying sources that might have been
>>>> used to compile the list; and the list has lost any similarity to the underlying
>>>> sources in terms of things like plot, theme, etc.
>>>>
>>>> So I think the risk is low.  We could probably reduce the risk by asking Stephan
>>>> where these lists came from, and if he is aware of any IP issues with them.
>>>>
>>>> To the extent that we collect information and form opinions on issues like this,
>>>> I recommend adding a file to the SVN, not necessarily included in the build,
>>>> called something like license-notice-research.txt, just to record these things
>>>> in one place, so we can find it quickly if a question comes up later and we want
>>>> to remember what and why we did something.
>>>>
>>>> -Marshall
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/8/2016 5:21 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>>>>> Checks:
>>>>>>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>>>>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>>>>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>>>>>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>>>>>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>>>>>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>>>>>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>>>>>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>>>>>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>>>>>>> problematic.
>>>>>>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>>>>>>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>>>>>>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>>>>>>> to the names needed for the example.
>>>>>> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
>>>>>> there is no original source file with a specific license.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
>>>>>> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
>>>>>> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
>>>>>> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
>>>>>> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?
>>>>> Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Richard
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
He crawled it from this site [1] and then he modified the result by
removing entries or single letters.

I do not see any license notice. Is this a good or bad sign for us?

IANAL (and actually do not know much about it) but I would assume that
it is not problematic. There is no specific source file and the owner
probably cannot call copyright for single firstnames.

Best,

Peter

[1] http://www.vornamen-liste.de/

Am 09.02.2016 um 10:17 schrieb Peter Klügl:
> I additionally sent an email to the last address I know.
>
> Am 08.02.2016 um 22:26 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>> The problem I see is that we currently do not know where the file comes from
>> (provenance). I find it hard to believe that the file was an original creation
>> from Stefan. I believe that it could take quite some time to compile such a
>> list of names. More likely is in my opinion, that the file was obtained from
>> some third-party source. 
>>
>> If we knew that third-party source, we might easily be able to clear IP.
>>
>> Since we do not know it, we currently have to resort to speculation about the
>> lawfulness of compiling specialized unigram lists.
>>
>> It looks like we can agree this is not a blocker for the present release as
>> involved risk is apparently very low. Still, we should try to clear this.
>>
>> I've placed a comment on UIMA-3926 asking Stefan to shed some light on the
>> provenance of the file. Let's see what comes of it.
>>
>> Thanks for digging up the issue number Marschall!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -- Richard
>>
>>> On 08.02.2016, at 21:56, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> So, first I'd like to summarize, in case I don't fully understand the issue.
>>>
>>> Ruta contains some examples; the example data include 90K file FirstNames.txt,
>>> in example-projects/GermanNovels/reosources.
>>>
>>> From what I can see, there are no actual German Novels included in the
>>> example-project/GermanNovels.
>>>
>>> From the discussion, it seems the word lists were not originally part of the
>>> contribution; but a comment in UIMA-3926 Peter asks if the word list could be
>>> contributed, but not the novels, and Stefan then contributed them.
>>>
>>> I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion, but I did a quick internet
>>> search and believe that compiling a list of words used in a novel does not
>>> infringe the copyright in that novel, because this data is entirely independent
>>> of the expressive value of any of the underlying sources that might have been
>>> used to compile the list; and the list has lost any similarity to the underlying
>>> sources in terms of things like plot, theme, etc.
>>>
>>> So I think the risk is low.  We could probably reduce the risk by asking Stephan
>>> where these lists came from, and if he is aware of any IP issues with them.
>>>
>>> To the extent that we collect information and form opinions on issues like this,
>>> I recommend adding a file to the SVN, not necessarily included in the build,
>>> called something like license-notice-research.txt, just to record these things
>>> in one place, so we can find it quickly if a question comes up later and we want
>>> to remember what and why we did something.
>>>
>>> -Marshall
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/8/2016 5:21 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>>>> Checks:
>>>>>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>>>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>>>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>>>>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>>>>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>>>>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>>>>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>>>>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>>>>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>>>>>> problematic.
>>>>>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>>>>>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>>>>>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>>>>>> to the names needed for the example.
>>>>> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
>>>>> there is no original source file with a specific license.
>>>>>
>>>>> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
>>>>> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
>>>>> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
>>>>> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
>>>>> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?
>>>> Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.
>>>>
>>>> -- Richard

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
I additionally sent an email to the last address I know.

Am 08.02.2016 um 22:26 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
> The problem I see is that we currently do not know where the file comes from
> (provenance). I find it hard to believe that the file was an original creation
> from Stefan. I believe that it could take quite some time to compile such a
> list of names. More likely is in my opinion, that the file was obtained from
> some third-party source. 
>
> If we knew that third-party source, we might easily be able to clear IP.
>
> Since we do not know it, we currently have to resort to speculation about the
> lawfulness of compiling specialized unigram lists.
>
> It looks like we can agree this is not a blocker for the present release as
> involved risk is apparently very low. Still, we should try to clear this.
>
> I've placed a comment on UIMA-3926 asking Stefan to shed some light on the
> provenance of the file. Let's see what comes of it.
>
> Thanks for digging up the issue number Marschall!
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Richard
>
>> On 08.02.2016, at 21:56, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, first I'd like to summarize, in case I don't fully understand the issue.
>>
>> Ruta contains some examples; the example data include 90K file FirstNames.txt,
>> in example-projects/GermanNovels/reosources.
>>
>> From what I can see, there are no actual German Novels included in the
>> example-project/GermanNovels.
>>
>> From the discussion, it seems the word lists were not originally part of the
>> contribution; but a comment in UIMA-3926 Peter asks if the word list could be
>> contributed, but not the novels, and Stefan then contributed them.
>>
>> I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion, but I did a quick internet
>> search and believe that compiling a list of words used in a novel does not
>> infringe the copyright in that novel, because this data is entirely independent
>> of the expressive value of any of the underlying sources that might have been
>> used to compile the list; and the list has lost any similarity to the underlying
>> sources in terms of things like plot, theme, etc.
>>
>> So I think the risk is low.  We could probably reduce the risk by asking Stephan
>> where these lists came from, and if he is aware of any IP issues with them.
>>
>> To the extent that we collect information and form opinions on issues like this,
>> I recommend adding a file to the SVN, not necessarily included in the build,
>> called something like license-notice-research.txt, just to record these things
>> in one place, so we can find it quickly if a question comes up later and we want
>> to remember what and why we did something.
>>
>> -Marshall
>>
>>
>> On 2/8/2016 5:21 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>>> On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>>> Checks:
>>>>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>>>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>>>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>>>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>>>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>>>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>>>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>>>>> problematic.
>>>>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>>>>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>>>>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>>>>> to the names needed for the example.
>>>> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
>>>> there is no original source file with a specific license.
>>>>
>>>> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
>>>> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
>>>> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
>>>> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
>>>> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?
>>> Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.
>>>
>>> -- Richard

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
The problem I see is that we currently do not know where the file comes from
(provenance). I find it hard to believe that the file was an original creation
from Stefan. I believe that it could take quite some time to compile such a
list of names. More likely is in my opinion, that the file was obtained from
some third-party source. 

If we knew that third-party source, we might easily be able to clear IP.

Since we do not know it, we currently have to resort to speculation about the
lawfulness of compiling specialized unigram lists.

It looks like we can agree this is not a blocker for the present release as
involved risk is apparently very low. Still, we should try to clear this.

I've placed a comment on UIMA-3926 asking Stefan to shed some light on the
provenance of the file. Let's see what comes of it.

Thanks for digging up the issue number Marschall!

Cheers,

-- Richard

> On 08.02.2016, at 21:56, Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com> wrote:
> 
> So, first I'd like to summarize, in case I don't fully understand the issue.
> 
> Ruta contains some examples; the example data include 90K file FirstNames.txt,
> in example-projects/GermanNovels/reosources.
> 
> From what I can see, there are no actual German Novels included in the
> example-project/GermanNovels.
> 
> From the discussion, it seems the word lists were not originally part of the
> contribution; but a comment in UIMA-3926 Peter asks if the word list could be
> contributed, but not the novels, and Stefan then contributed them.
> 
> I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion, but I did a quick internet
> search and believe that compiling a list of words used in a novel does not
> infringe the copyright in that novel, because this data is entirely independent
> of the expressive value of any of the underlying sources that might have been
> used to compile the list; and the list has lost any similarity to the underlying
> sources in terms of things like plot, theme, etc.
> 
> So I think the risk is low.  We could probably reduce the risk by asking Stephan
> where these lists came from, and if he is aware of any IP issues with them.
> 
> To the extent that we collect information and form opinions on issues like this,
> I recommend adding a file to the SVN, not necessarily included in the build,
> called something like license-notice-research.txt, just to record these things
> in one place, so we can find it quickly if a question comes up later and we want
> to remember what and why we did something.
> 
> -Marshall
> 
> 
> On 2/8/2016 5:21 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>> On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>>> Checks:
>>>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>>>> problematic.
>>>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>>>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>>>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>>>> to the names needed for the example.
>>> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
>>> there is no original source file with a specific license.
>>> 
>>> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
>>> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
>>> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
>>> 
>>> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
>>> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
>>> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?
>> Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.
>> 
>> -- Richard
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
So, first I'd like to summarize, in case I don't fully understand the issue.

Ruta contains some examples; the example data include 90K file FirstNames.txt,
in example-projects/GermanNovels/reosources.

>From what I can see, there are no actual German Novels included in the
example-project/GermanNovels.

>From the discussion, it seems the word lists were not originally part of the
contribution; but a comment in UIMA-3926 Peter asks if the word list could be
contributed, but not the novels, and Stefan then contributed them.

I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion, but I did a quick internet
search and believe that compiling a list of words used in a novel does not
infringe the copyright in that novel, because this data is entirely independent
of the expressive value of any of the underlying sources that might have been
used to compile the list; and the list has lost any similarity to the underlying
sources in terms of things like plot, theme, etc.

So I think the risk is low.  We could probably reduce the risk by asking Stephan
where these lists came from, and if he is aware of any IP issues with them.

To the extent that we collect information and form opinions on issues like this,
I recommend adding a file to the SVN, not necessarily included in the build,
called something like license-notice-research.txt, just to record these things
in one place, so we can find it quickly if a question comes up later and we want
to remember what and why we did something.

-Marshall


On 2/8/2016 5:21 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
> On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>>> Checks:
>>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>>> problematic.
>>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>>> to the names needed for the example.
>> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
>> there is no original source file with a specific license.
>>
>> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
>> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
>> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
>>
>> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
>> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
>> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?
> Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.
>
> -- Richard

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
On 08.02.2016, at 11:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
> 
> Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>>> Checks:
>>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>>> problematic.
>> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
>> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
>> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
>> to the names needed for the example.
> 
> If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
> there is no original source file with a specific license.
> 
> The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
> all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
> that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.
> 
> Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
> were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
> I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?

Let's see what Marshall thinks about it.

-- Richard

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
Hi,

Am 08.02.2016 um 10:44 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
> On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>>> Checks:
>>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
>> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
>> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
>> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
>> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
>> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
>> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
>> problematic.
> The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
> file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
> in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
> to the names needed for the example.

If I have to guess I'd say that the names have been crawled and that
there is no original source file with a specific license.

The novels had the CC license last time I checked. I do not remember
all, but when I looked it up in Apache's third party pages, it indicated
that it was not possible to include them. However, I could have been wrong.

Hmm... it depends what is needed for the example. The initial example
were 10-20 novels. I could strip it down to the firstnames of one novel
I remember to be part of the dev set, but is that really necessary?


>>> Questions:
>>> - several files in the GermanNovels resources have the first word duplicated, they also start with a BOM - necessary?
>> The BOM is the reason why the wordlists contain duplicate entries in the
>> beginning. This is an open issue [UIMA-3778]. The BOM is not necessary,
>> but was simply not removed.
> Ok, so this is on the radar.
>
>>> - is it necessary that the GermanNovels example contains GeneratedDKPRoCoreTypes.xml - can these not be obtained through Maven? If it is necessary, provenance information would be good.
>> It was necessary when the rules were contributed, but it would be
>> possible now with some new features. I do not have the time to upgrade
>> the project (its priority is too low and it would require to change the
>> tutorial). I could add provenance information. I assume that it should
>> be in a README file but not in the NOTICE file, or is there an issue
>> converning the DKPro type systems?
> The DKPro Core type systems are covered by ASL (although for some reason
> there are no ASL headers in the original DKPro Core XML files...). So
> in principle there is no problem, and because the original files don't have
> ASL headers, they also were not stripped by the aggregation process - again
> no problem.
>
> My understanding is that staying strict to the Apache rules, the contents
> of the NOTICE of the DKPro Core artifacts from which the types were
> obtained would need to be copied into a NOTICE within the examples
> project. If Ruta could obtain the types directly from the Maven artifacts,
> the types file and NOTICE inclusion would not be necessary.
>
> If we all agree that this should be fixed for the next release after 2.4.0,
> I'd be ok for me. I am making these comments definitely with the Apache 
> hat on, not with the DKPro Core hat on.

I created an issue for it: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-4789

Best,

Peter

>>> Comments:
>>> - tutorial-GermanNovels.tex is written in German, not English. 
>> That was the target group of the tutorial and there was no volunteer to
>> translate it.
> Ok.
>
>>> So much so far.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> -- Richard
>>>
>>>> On 29.01.2016, at 11:25, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>>>
>>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>>> literal string expression matcher
>>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>>> generic feature expression
>>>>
>>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>>>
>>>> General information:
>>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>>>
>>>> Staging repository:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>>>
>>>> SVN tag:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>>>
>>>> Update site:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>>>
>>>> Archive with all sources:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>>>
>>>> ... and here:
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on release:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Peter

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
On 08.02.2016, at 10:11, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
>> Checks:
>> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
>> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
>> - stopping checks at this point for the moment
> 
> What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
> with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
> present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
> I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
> files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
> test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
> problematic.

The other dev/test data doesn't seem problematic at all, but the 90k names
file seems non-trivial. If it were CC, the license would need to be mentioned
in a LICENSE.txt file. My suggestion would be to simply strip the file down
to the names needed for the example.

>> Questions:
>> - several files in the GermanNovels resources have the first word duplicated, they also start with a BOM - necessary?
> 
> The BOM is the reason why the wordlists contain duplicate entries in the
> beginning. This is an open issue [UIMA-3778]. The BOM is not necessary,
> but was simply not removed.

Ok, so this is on the radar.

>> - is it necessary that the GermanNovels example contains GeneratedDKPRoCoreTypes.xml - can these not be obtained through Maven? If it is necessary, provenance information would be good.
> 
> It was necessary when the rules were contributed, but it would be
> possible now with some new features. I do not have the time to upgrade
> the project (its priority is too low and it would require to change the
> tutorial). I could add provenance information. I assume that it should
> be in a README file but not in the NOTICE file, or is there an issue
> converning the DKPro type systems?

The DKPro Core type systems are covered by ASL (although for some reason
there are no ASL headers in the original DKPro Core XML files...). So
in principle there is no problem, and because the original files don't have
ASL headers, they also were not stripped by the aggregation process - again
no problem.

My understanding is that staying strict to the Apache rules, the contents
of the NOTICE of the DKPro Core artifacts from which the types were
obtained would need to be copied into a NOTICE within the examples
project. If Ruta could obtain the types directly from the Maven artifacts,
the types file and NOTICE inclusion would not be necessary.

If we all agree that this should be fixed for the next release after 2.4.0,
I'd be ok for me. I am making these comments definitely with the Apache 
hat on, not with the DKPro Core hat on.

>> Comments:
>> - tutorial-GermanNovels.tex is written in German, not English. 
> 
> That was the target group of the tutorial and there was no volunteer to
> translate it.

Ok.

> 
>> So much so far.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> -- Richard
>> 
>>> On 29.01.2016, at 11:25, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>> 
>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>> literal string expression matcher
>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>> generic feature expression
>>> 
>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>> 
>>> General information:
>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>> 
>>> Staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>> 
>>> SVN tag:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>> 
>>> Update site:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>> 
>>> Archive with all sources:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>> 
>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>> 
>>> ... and here:
>>> 
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>> 
>>> Please vote on release:
>>> 
>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> Peter
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
Hi,

Am 07.02.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho:
> Checks:
> - compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
> - the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
> - stopping checks at this point for the moment

What kind of source info/license would you expect? The file together
with the other files was contributed as part of UIMA-3926 with an ICLA
present. I do not remember if I knew the source of the file by then, but
I remember that I had some conversations with the contributor that the
files need to be OK for a contribution. That's the reason why the
test/dev data was not contributed since it had some CC license that was
problematic.

> Questions:
> - several files in the GermanNovels resources have the first word duplicated, they also start with a BOM - necessary?

The BOM is the reason why the wordlists contain duplicate entries in the
beginning. This is an open issue [UIMA-3778]. The BOM is not necessary,
but was simply not removed.

> - is it necessary that the GermanNovels example contains GeneratedDKPRoCoreTypes.xml - can these not be obtained through Maven? If it is necessary, provenance information would be good.

It was necessary when the rules were contributed, but it would be
possible now with some new features. I do not have the time to upgrade
the project (its priority is too low and it would require to change the
tutorial). I could add provenance information. I assume that it should
be in a README file but not in the NOTICE file, or is there an issue
converning the DKPro type systems?

> Comments:
> - tutorial-GermanNovels.tex is written in German, not English. 

That was the target group of the tutorial and there was no volunteer to
translate it.

Best,

Peter


> So much so far.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Richard
>
>> On 29.01.2016, at 11:25, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>
>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>> literal string expression matcher
>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>> generic feature expression
>>
>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>
>> General information:
>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>> - New action for splitting annotations
>> - New block for resetting match context
>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>
>> SVN tag:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>
>> Update site:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>
>> Archive with all sources:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>
>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>
>> ... and here:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>
>> Please vote on release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Peter

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Richard Eckart de Castilho <re...@apache.org>.
Checks:
- compared POMs in 2.3.0 svn tag against 2.4.0 tag: no new dependencies - OK
- the FirstNames.txt file in GermanNovels is quite large 90k, but no source info/license for this file is given anywhere: doesn't seem OK
- stopping checks at this point for the moment

Questions:
- several files in the GermanNovels resources have the first word duplicated, they also start with a BOM - necessary?
- is it necessary that the GermanNovels example contains GeneratedDKPRoCoreTypes.xml - can these not be obtained through Maven? If it is necessary, provenance information would be good.

Comments:
- tutorial-GermanNovels.tex is written in German, not English. 

So much so far.

Cheers,

-- Richard

> On 29.01.2016, at 11:25, Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
> 
> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
> literal string expression matcher
> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
> generic feature expression
> 
> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
> 
> General information:
> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
> - New action for splitting annotations
> - New block for resetting match context
> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
> 
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
> 
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
> 
> Update site:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
> 
> Archive with all sources:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
> 
> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
> "Cannot Reproduce").
> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
> 
> ... and here:
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
> 
> Please vote on release:
> 
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ]  0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Peter

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
compared svn-tag with source-release - OK (only the usual diff)
mvn clean install svn-tag - OK
mvn clean install source-release - OK

installed workbench in mars with uima 2.8.1 features present - OK
created project and tested a simple script - OK

checked some license and notice files - OK (only the flaws known from
the last releases)
checked release notes, readme, jira-report - OK
checked asc, md5, sha1 of source release - OK

[X] +1 OK to release

Am 29.01.2016 um 11:25 schrieb Peter Klügl:
> Hi,
>
> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>
> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
> literal string expression matcher
> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
> generic feature expression
>
> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>
> General information:
> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
> - New action for splitting annotations
> - New block for resetting match context
> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>
> Update site:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>
> Archive with all sources:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>
> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
> "Cannot Reproduce").
> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>
> ... and here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ]  0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
Hi,

the vote has passed with the following results:

3 (Binding) +1 Peter Klügl, Marshall Schor, Richard Eckart de Castilho

No other votes received.

Thanks to all for voting.

Best,

Peter

Am 29.01.2016 um 11:25 schrieb Peter Klügl:
> Hi,
>
> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>
> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
> literal string expression matcher
> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
> generic feature expression
>
> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>
> General information:
> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
> - New action for splitting annotations
> - New block for resetting match context
> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>
> Update site:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>
> Archive with all sources:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>
> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
> "Cannot Reproduce").
> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>
> ... and here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ]  0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
Tested it right away... the test is still fulfilled :-)

Am 01.02.2016 um 20:33 schrieb Marshall Schor:
> OK, I guess this isn't a blocker, especially if you manually test the
> ContainsTest and verify it is OK :-).
>
> -Marshall
>
> On 2/1/2016 12:37 PM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the test in AnnotationLabelExpressionTest is deactivated by purpose, but not
>> the first test in ContainsTest.
>> I must have added the @Ignore in ContainsTest for debugging when I added the
>> second test for the bug of the last rc.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Am 01.02.2016 um 16:34 schrieb Marshall Schor:
>>> While building ruta-core from sources, the test phase reports 2 tests as
>>> "skipped".
>>>
>>> One is AnnotationLabelExpressionTest, the other is ContainsTest
>>>
>>> Is this expected?
>>>
>>> -Marshall
>>>
>>> On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>>>
>>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>>> literal string expression matcher
>>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>>> generic feature expression
>>>>
>>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>>>
>>>> General information:
>>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>>>
>>>> Staging repository:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>>>
>>>> SVN tag:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>>>
>>>> Update site:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Archive with all sources:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>>>
>>>> ... and here:
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on release:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
OK, I guess this isn't a blocker, especially if you manually test the
ContainsTest and verify it is OK :-).

-Marshall

On 2/1/2016 12:37 PM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the test in AnnotationLabelExpressionTest is deactivated by purpose, but not
> the first test in ContainsTest.
> I must have added the @Ignore in ContainsTest for debugging when I added the
> second test for the bug of the last rc.
>
> Best,
>
> Peter
>
> Am 01.02.2016 um 16:34 schrieb Marshall Schor:
>> While building ruta-core from sources, the test phase reports 2 tests as
>> "skipped".
>>
>> One is AnnotationLabelExpressionTest, the other is ContainsTest
>>
>> Is this expected?
>>
>> -Marshall
>>
>> On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>>
>>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>>> literal string expression matcher
>>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>>> generic feature expression
>>>
>>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>>
>>> General information:
>>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>>> - New action for splitting annotations
>>> - New block for resetting match context
>>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>>
>>> Staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>>
>>> SVN tag:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>>
>>> Update site:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>>
>>>
>>> Archive with all sources:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>>
>>>
>>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>>
>>> ... and here:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>>
>>>
>>> Please vote on release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Peter Klügl <pe...@averbis.com>.
Hi,

the test in AnnotationLabelExpressionTest is deactivated by purpose, but 
not the first test in ContainsTest.
I must have added the @Ignore in ContainsTest for debugging when I added 
the second test for the bug of the last rc.

Best,

Peter

Am 01.02.2016 um 16:34 schrieb Marshall Schor:
> While building ruta-core from sources, the test phase reports 2 tests as "skipped".
>
> One is AnnotationLabelExpressionTest, the other is ContainsTest
>
> Is this expected?
>
> -Marshall
>
> On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>>
>> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
>> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
>> literal string expression matcher
>> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
>> generic feature expression
>>
>> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
>> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>>
>> General information:
>> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
>> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
>> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
>> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
>> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
>> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
>> - New action for splitting annotations
>> - New block for resetting match context
>> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
>> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>>
>> Staging repository:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>>
>> SVN tag:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>>
>> Update site:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>>
>> Archive with all sources:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>>
>> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
>> "Cannot Reproduce").
>> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>>
>> ... and here:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>>
>> Please vote on release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 OK to release
>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Peter
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache UIMA Ruta 2.4.0 RC3

Posted by Marshall Schor <ms...@schor.com>.
While building ruta-core from sources, the test phase reports 2 tests as "skipped".

One is AnnotationLabelExpressionTest, the other is ContainsTest

Is this expected?

-Marshall

On 1/29/2016 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the third release candidate of Apache UIMA Ruta v2.4.0 is ready for voting.
>
> Changes rc2 -> rc3:
> - UIMA-4758 - Ruta: reluctant qualifier right to left lookahead to
> literal string expression matcher
> - UIMA-4768 - Ruta: generic argument for aliases type interpreted as
> generic feature expression
>
> Changes rc1 -> rc2:
> - UIMA-4760 - Ruta: duplicate verbalization of type in type matcher
>
> General information:
> This release contains many nice and useful new features and additionally
> fixed many annoying bugs. Here's a short overview of the main changes:
> - Explicit referencing of annotations with variables, labels and addresses
> - Helper methods for applying rules directly in Java code
> - Macros for conditions and actions (prototypical)
> - Limited support of UIMA arrays (prototypical)
> - New action for splitting annotations
> - New block for resetting match context
> - Import of uimaFIT analysis engines with manditory parameters
> - Many, many bug fixes and other improvements
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheuima-1083/
>
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/uima/ruta/tags/ruta-2.4.0
>
> Update site:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/eclipse-update-site/ruta/
>
> Archive with all sources:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/uima/ruta-2.4.0-rc3/source-release/ruta-2.4.0-source-release.zip
>
> Overall 52 issues have been fixed for this release (one of them with
> "Cannot Reproduce").
> They can be found in the RELEASE_NOTES.html.
>
> ... and here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12333870&jql=project%20%3D%20UIMA%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.4.0ruta%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ruta%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20ASC%2C%20created%20DESC
>
> Please vote on release:
>
> [ ] +1 OK to release
> [ ]  0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Not OK to release, because ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter
>