Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-uima-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-uima-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5CB8911C93 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 12:33:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 90301 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2014 12:33:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-uima-user-archive@uima.apache.org Received: (qmail 90262 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2014 12:33:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@uima.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@uima.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@uima.apache.org Received: (qmail 90249 invoked by uid 99); 1 Sep 2014 12:33:49 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 12:33:49 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kottmann@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.172 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.217.172] (HELO mail-lb0-f172.google.com) (209.85.217.172) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 12:33:45 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f172.google.com with SMTP id 10so5858731lbg.31 for ; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 05:33:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=uZST/xPpgcgo8pYLer1O1UJM4iaNKJFAh9FisGjbq2s=; b=x0DuLCKtTYW0KZYpMmlbMzkLi8LMERamtm6ufOot3AvZPy9Cap7BYiKtGR+BIHDGbg JDVYIAKAYGZV/db6yQxXp17JqO8vpO6YoIg4oJaSs2PaBmNj1R1AvcfKgRvB3MONWe+Q WOk6qETokKMN9qANeGWQoj37pk3pQ8dHAIQQ7cN0pVo/KYhU8Jog4VFACsqngoQ5Jgdt 3PTO71M628oJSL0TGUADnjZOMxJYIZJHjjyZPr+zOlDZJ6UyHo++YjsH7/wKn5x9ydQA 2xnBIW0bqcmyvnKxued0MX3AcaJr7GKFno5grQO7o0ClhUibcMjDwElPjm9oyDEBCywI XFog== X-Received: by 10.112.141.7 with SMTP id rk7mr7660541lbb.83.1409574804109; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 05:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.7.12] ([195.218.7.44]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i3sm496351laa.8.2014.09.01.05.33.22 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Sep 2014 05:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <54046791.1040601@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 14:33:21 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn_Kottmann?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: user@uima.apache.org Subject: Re: AW: AW: Lucas References: <53F74764.40306@gmail.com> <317F1011-4213-4F13-A6E6-FB6D2EDC1C8E@uni-jena.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hello, when I helped out with the Solr integration we still used UIMA to index documents in our search servers. We don't do that anymore. The indexing code now runs directly as a MapReduce job for batch indexing, and in Storm for real time indexing. J�rn On 08/26/2014 09:43 AM, Armin.Wegner@bka.bund.de wrote: > Hi Erik and J�rn, > > I've used Solr in the meantime. It is so easy to quickly write a CAS consumer that sends documents to a Solr web service. Writing to a Lucene index is minimally more work. Could this be the reason why nobody cares about the outdated version? Is there really a need for Lucas and Solrcas anymore? What do you think? It would be nice to have some opinions on this. > > Of all people reading this list, who wants to have a Lucas or Solrcas for the current version of Lucene? > > Cheers, > Armin > > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Erik F��ler [mailto:erik.faessler@uni-jena.de] > Gesendet: Freitag, 22. August 2014 16:34 > An: user@uima.apache.org > Betreff: Re: AW: Lucas > > I am using LuCas in production in the last SNAPSHOT version that can be found in the SVN but not in the maven repository. I was also not aware a patch would be required to get it to work, I am using it in its current SVN state, including the splitter filter. > I would be willing to help with a migration and contribute to discussions/plans. However, I won't have time to do it all on my own, especially since I use it as a bridge to Solr/ElasticSearch that kind of remedies the version difference. Thus I use it with newer Solr/ES versions without problems so far. > > I will be on vacations for two weeks, after that I'd be available for contributions. > > Best, > > Erik > >> On 22 Aug 2014, at 15:36, J�rn Kottmann wrote: >> >> It would probably nice to migrate those to the current versions of Lucene/Solr. >> >> J�rn >> >>> On 08/13/2014 08:44 AM, Armin.Wegner@bka.bund.de wrote: >>> Hi Renauld, >>> >>> that's nice, thank you. Are you using Lucene 4.x or an older version? >>> >>> It's a while ago, that I've asked that question and I didn't get much response. Is the project dead? Is it just to easy to code a simple annotator for Lucene or Solr to justify the effort maintaining Lucas and Solrcas? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Armin >>> >>> >>> -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: Renaud Richardet [mailto:renaud.richardet@epfl.ch] >>> Gesendet: Montag, 11. August 2014 23:12 >>> An: user@uima.apache.org >>> Betreff: Re: Lucas >>> >>> Hi Armin, >>> >>> I used it a while ago. I had to apply the following patch to make it work: >>> https://gist.github.com/renaud/bc34a48ca22f787f6c11 >>> >>> HTH, Renaud >>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 2:55 PM, wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> Is someone using Lucas? It seems to be slightly outdated. It depends >>>> on Lucene 2.9.3. Lucene is at version 4.9.0 right now. Is there an alternative? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Armin >>> -- >>> Renaud Richardet >>> Blue Brain Project PhD candidate >>> EPFL Station 15 >>> CH-1015 Lausanne >>> phone: +41-78-675-9501 >>> http://people.epfl.ch/renaud.richardet