uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benjamin Sznajder <benj...@il.ibm.com>
Subject Re: Installer in UIMA Apache
Date Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:57:38 GMT
Hi Adam,

Refering to your mail, I think that the user is not "aware" about this
README file. You may mention its existence in the download page, maybe?


             "Adam Lally"                                                  
             edu>                                                       To 
             Sent by:                  uima-dev@incubator.apache.org       
             lally.adam@gmail.                                          cc 
                                       Re: Installer in UIMA Apache        
             16/04/2007 16:49                                              
             Please respond to                                             

On 4/15/07, Benjamin Sznajder <benjams@il.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I used until now the IBM UIMA (from watson's site) and I am passing now
> the Apache version.
> I permit myself to suggest the following:
> In IBM version, the user was able to download the installer that made for
> him all the work. Why there is not such utility in Apache's version,
> an installer that would set the desired property values?

Primarily this is because InstallShield is not free, and now that
we're at Apache we prefer using freely available tools to build our
distribution.  There might be a free alternative we could try (I
haven't looked), but it doesn't seem to be common among Apache
projects to provide an installer.

> In addition, I think that there is no clear information about how to
> install the UIMA Sdk. In fact, there is no real intuitive place where the
> user can find this information. It is only said "by the way" in the
> documentation.

The README is intended to provide this information.  Is there any
important information that you could not find there?

> And a last question: why is the README file (in the zip) with no suffix ?
> Why .txt is not suitable?

It seemed to be a common Apache convention, although it's not an
absolute rule and some other projects do use .txt.  I don't feel
strongly about it either way.  Anyone else have an opinion?


View raw message