opennlp-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aliaksandr Autayeu <>
Subject Re: prerequisites for forking openNLP?
Date Mon, 16 Apr 2012 18:23:35 GMT
Jim, forking is easy, merging is hard. And forking is now but merging is in
future, and this makes it very seductive :)

It took me some iterations with Jörn and others on my initial proposal
about CLI, but at the end the idea became much better. You might
benefit too by working on your proposal with the community.


On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Jim - FooBar(); <>wrote:

> On 16/04/12 14:41, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
>> Here is an article about forking AL licensed software:
> wow...that article explains everything i need to know! thanks Jorn you
> seem to be very resourceful :-)
>  You did not get any negative feedback on OPENNLP-496,
>> the reason you did not get more feedback is simply that it was proposed
>> on a Friday
>> and no one looked at it over the weekend.
> aaa ok i see...i apologise for drawing conclusions. well, it's not that
> i'm in a hurry or anything i just hate feeling that i'm becoming a burden
> that you have to endure on the mailing list. I'm pretty sure you're all
> busy with your own "stuff" so i thought perhaps forking is the best
> solution here...i can see great potential in openNLP and that is what
> drives me - otherwise i would not bother, trust me! i guess you're right -
>  i should  wait for some feedback before i take any 'big' decisions...
> thanks again!
> Jim

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