ctakes-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anirban Chakraborti <chakraborti.anir...@googlemail.com>
Subject 3.1.2 release
Date Tue, 24 Jun 2014 03:53:26 GMT
When is the release planned.
On 24 Jun 2014 02:11, "Masanz, James J." <Masanz.James@mayo.edu> wrote:

>
> That would be good to know.  I think a good start would be to have a
> comparison from one release to the next, where when release N is built,
> some test is run using release N and using release N-1.  The CPE Gui will
> show a breakdown of how long each annotator took in total for a set of
> documents. I assume we could get that information programmatically fairly
> easy.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AndyMC@apache.org (Andy McMurry) [mailto:mcmurry.andy@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 2:57 PM
> To: dev@ctakes.apache.org
> Subject: Re: LVG Thread Safety
>
> I wonder how much cTAKES performance changes with even minor changes to
> LVG.
>
> In principle, thread safety shouldn't change the output, but even minor
> updates (LVG.2014) makes me wonder.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Jun 23, 2014, at 11:58 AM, "John Green" <john.travis.green@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Nice!-
> > Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Chen, Pei <
> Pei.Chen@childrens.harvard.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +dev@
> >> Chris,
> >> This awesome news.  Yes we'll be happy to try out the fix.
> >> Thanks again,
> >> Pei
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CTAKES-151
> >> From: Lu, Chris (NIH/NLM/LHC) [C] [mailto:chlu@mail.nih.gov]
> >> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 2:54 PM
> >> To: Chen, Pei
> >> Cc: Browne, Allen (NIH/NLM/LHC) [E]; Lu, Chris (NIH/NLM/LHC) [C]
> >> Subject: RE: LVG Thread Safety
> >> Hi Pei,
> >> How are you doing?
> >> We have evaluated your request regarding to the thread safety issue on
> the SPECIALIST Lexical Tools. Bellows are the summary. Please let us know
> if you have any suggestions, comments, or questions. This SCR is a major
> source code change and, if you like, we will send you a nightly built
> version of lvg.2015 (using lvg.2014 data) in July so you can try it before
> the official NLM internal release of lvg.2015 is released (in Oct.). Please
> let us know, Thank you!
> >> 1). Static variables
> >> => Thank you (and Kim) to point out this issue. Here are how we plan to
> modify "static variables" in the Java codes:
> >> 1-a). Change static variables to final static variables (if applicable)
> >> 1-b). Change static variables to local variables (if applicable)
> >> 1-c). Keep "static String fieldSeparator_" in Lib.GlobalBehavior.java
> and use "synchronized" for the associated static methods.
> >> ð  There will be too many changes for Flows APIs if we decided to
> change it to local variable.
> >> 1-d). Keep the rest of static variables under GuiTool
> >> ð  Assuming users do not use GuiTool (lgt) under multi-thread
> environment.
> >> There are 88 files need to be modified for this software change request.
> >> 2) Standardize Java package namespace convention on lvg API:
> >> => There were legacy reasons that all Lvg Java codes under directory of
> Tools do not use the standard Java package convention. However, we are
> happy to make the change for your requests.
> >> There are 11 Java files of command line tools and 43 Java files of GUI
> tool need to be modified.
> >> Hope this helps. Thank you!
> >> Best Regards
> >> -          Chris
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message