"CVS Checkout and Branches"

IngoRM

Hi,

I just wanted to let you know that you of course still can checkout the latest version of RapidMiner via anonymous CVS like it is described here:

http://rapid-i.com/content/view/25/48/


There are several things to note:

• The branch "HEAD" is now a bugfix branch which is based on the latest official release and contains all bugfixes since then.
• New features will no longer be added to the HEAD branch but to the latest developer branch. Currently this branch is named "Wasat".
• There is a delay between our developer CVS servers and the anonymous CVS servers. It might happen that the synchronization takes several hours.

Cheers,
Ingo

DrGary

What's the relationship between the releases and the CVS repository? For example, I haven't found the new 4.5 operators anywhere, including head... What's the relationship between Yed, Wasat, Zaniah, and rincewind?

Thanks

land

Hi,
let's first explain the easy things: The names are the internal codenames for one version of rapid miner. So, Wasat is 4.5, Yed was 4.4 and Zaniah was 4.3. Rincewind, as immediately understandable for all who know this famous character of Pratchett's discworld, is a failed branch, so just ignore it If you take a look at the branches, you will recognize some sort of order and a common theme, at least if you are familiar with astronomy, and probably will be able to predict which name the next version will have

Currently we have some problems with the sourceforge cvs. In the past we were so frustrated from waiting half an hour for performing an update, that we moved to a local repository. Our admins are currently working on mirroring the local repository to the sourceforge cvs, so that one can checkout the latest, bugfixed version of each branch. Until they got this to work, you might use the downloadable source code, which is in fact the latest version until now.

Greetings,
  Sebastian

kochan

Hi,

Just to be perfectly clear about the cvs problems. Does it mean that the code that I check out from the sourceforge repository is not the latest version? And does that mean that there is no cvs access to the latest version from the outside?

I have checked out the Wasat branch, which I expected to be the 4.5 version, but if I look in the build.properties file it says 4.4.

Regards,

Andreas

land

Hi Andreas,
our admins have found a solution for that. BUT: Unfortunately we need a password from someone who is on vacation right now...
So until he returns, you will NOT have access to the latest source files from the repository.
The good news on that topic: When he returns we will switch to SVN on sourceforge, what should increase the performance.

Greetings,
  Sebastian

phb

i cant find any branch for version 4.6. any hints?

land

Hi,
as you might have read in this topic there is no recent version of RapidMiner in the sourceforge repository. Unfortunately sourceforge blocks a command, necessary for synchronizing our local repository with the sourceforge one. And they don't seem to be very eager to change that, also there is already a suggestion on their feature request site. If you have a sourceforge account, you might very well vote for this feature.
Until then our admin uses his free time (which is small enough as always)  to find some way around. Until then, or until sourceforge changes this one setting, you might use the version which comes with RapidMiner. The 4.6 version is up-to-date since we are mainly focusing on 5.0 now.

Greetings,
  Sebastian

holger

Hello Sebastian.

Sebastian Land wrote:
The good news on that topic: When he returns we will switch to SVN on sourceforge, what should increase the performance.

Any progress with migrating to svn? Being a sf.net project, hosting of the sources in a public code repository seems to be a more natural solution compared with a the currently used closed SCM. This would allow developers to contribute bug-fixes/patches and to provide conceptual feedback to make RM even better. :-)

So even if imho an unusual question for an "open source" project:
Is there any possibility to get a recent src-snapshot or RM5, which would allow to inspect the new operator/process-API? Maybe this could include even a draft of the (partially) updated documentation...

Best, Holger

land

Hi,
the current stable version is already mirrored on the SVN on source-forge. RapidMiner 5 will be there as soon as we publish the final version.
You might take the API from the Beta version anyway, there hasn't been conceptual changes, if I remember correctly.

Sorry for the inconvenience, but did you ever worked on sf with a big project like that? Everyone of us waited half an hour per day just for synchronizing. That was too disgusting. And in the past the number of contributors was not that big, that it was worth having these problems...

Greetings,
  Sebastian

holger

Hi Sebastian,

thanks for your quick response. To allow other RM-newbies to be less confused, you could consider to change http://rapid-i.com/content/view/24/47/lang,en/ as this is still pointing to cvs and not svn.

Sebastian Land wrote:
the current stable version is already mirrored on the SVN on source-forge. RapidMiner 5 will be there as soon as we publish the final version. You might take the API from the Beta version anyway, there hasn't been conceptual changes, if I remember correctly.

According to what I read in the RM-forums, the plugin-API changed significantly between 4.X and 5. Do you refer to the API-doc in the sf.net-release? Or is there a source-snapshot available somewhere else for RM5b?

Sebastian Land wrote:
Sorry for the inconvenience, but did you ever worked on sf with a big project like that? Everyone of us waited half an hour per day just for synchronizing. That was too disgusting. And in the past the number of contributors was not that big, that it was worth having these problems...

I worked for years with the Sphinx-project on sf.net, which is an open-source speech recognition system. The HEAD was around 800mb (which is 10xRM), because we also included some test-speech corpora. And according to my experience, sf.net-svn-performance was quite alright during the last time. For sure we didn't do repository syncing but the usual 'svn ci/co'.

Concerning contributors: I clearly see your point, however, contributors and SCM (not just an occasionally mirrored one, which does only partially reflects how a projects evolves) are linked to each other. Personally, I would probably work out a patch for a particular problem, only when I'm sure that the problem has not yet been addressed. But without having (at least read) access to the development-SCM, this is something quite hard to figure out. For sure, I could write mails, file tracker issues and so on, but than even simple patches blow up to a considerable amount of work.

So if svn-performance is really an issue for you and sf.net-svn not an option, you could/should provide read-access to your rapid-i-internal SCM, which would fix both problems and would make everyone happy. :-)

Don't get my criticism wrong, I just want figure out to which extent I can rely on the openness of RM before pushing the people in my group away from Knime towards RM. :-)

Greetings, Holger

IngoRM

Ok guys,

please calm down. The source code of RM5beta was part of the release. Just checkout the "src" folder of the release and you will get the snapshot of the source code of the released version.

And of course you are right and giving access to the sources will ease patching etc. for the developers in our community. So this is high on our agenda. But as Sebastian has pointed out, we had some troubles with SF in the past and it least managed to get the stable branch (RM 4.6x) up again. And also the code access to the latest developer version of RM 5 is on it's way so please be patient enough for just a few days. Just think of it as another X-mas present 

I just want figure out to which extent I can rely on the openness of RM before pushing the people in my group away from Knime towards RM. :-)

The core of RM has always been and always will be open source. This was true since the very first days of its development and even in times where Knime had used this creepy only-partly-open-source-license-for-some-users-but-not-for-others  :P

So you can be assured that RM is as open as it can be...

Cheers,
Ingo

holger

Hi Ingo,

Ingo Mierswa wrote:
Just checkout the "src" folder of the release and you will get the snapshot of the source code of the released version.

That's the answer I needed.  Now I can enjoy to read the sources and wait for the release (getreu dem Motto "Vorfreude ist die schoenste Freude").

Ingo Mierswa wrote:
Just think of it as another X-mas present

I love Christmas  ::)

Ingo Mierswa wrote:
even in times where Knime had used this creepy only-partly-open-source-license-for-some-users-but-not-for-others

creepy: +1
It's great news for me, that you feel the same about the "open(fake)source"-approach of knime.

Best,
Holger

IngoRM

Hi Holger,

so have fun with your additional present 

Cheers,
Ingo

fischer

Hi all,

the 5.0 (Vega) branch is back on sourceforge now:

https://yale.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/yale/Vega/

Cheers,
Simon

holger

Great work! That's how opensource should look like.  Thanks a lot. It compiles and runs out of the box. :-)

-holger

mtgreen

I'm confused (and I'm sure it's just me).  I last checked out RM 4.4 using the CVS instructions for Eclipse.  I'm trying to get the updated code from RM 4.6.  However, when I use CVS (within Eclipse) to look for versions, I don't see anything beyond 4.4.  When I try to replace with "HEAD", I don't think I get anything beyond 4.4.

Am I missing something?  How can I update my source code from 4.4 to 4.6?  Thanks!

~Michael

land

Hi Michael,
the current version is checked in in the new svn repository. We have to change the website. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Greetings,
  Sebastian

haddock

Hi there,

I've noticed that the SVN repository is on 5.004 Vega, whereas the latest release is on 5.006 Vega. Any chance of synchronising them ?

Many thanks.

haddock

Hi there,

More build problems I'm afraid. I've just synchronised and tried to build, but got the following error...

Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: "${rapidminer"
	at java.lang.NumberFormatException.forInputString(NumberFormatException.java:48)
	at java.lang.Integer.parseInt(Integer.java:449)
	at java.lang.Integer.parseInt(Integer.java:499)
	at com.rapidminer.gui.tools.VersionNumber.<init>(VersionNumber.java:80)
	at com.rapidminer.tools.ParameterService.getUserConfigFile(ParameterService.java:259)
	at com.rapidminer.tools.ParameterService.loadAllRCFiles(ParameterService.java:297)
	at com.rapidminer.tools.ParameterService.init(ParameterService.java:139)
	at com.rapidminer.tools.ParameterService.init(ParameterService.java:133)
	at com.rapidminer.RapidMiner.init(RapidMiner.java:384)
	at com.rapidminer.gui.RapidMinerGUI.run(RapidMinerGUI.java:208)
	at com.rapidminer.gui.RapidMinerGUI.main(RapidMinerGUI.java:527)

The problem seems to be in Version.java where I now have this on local

version number in RapidMiner. */ 
package com.rapidminer; /** This
           class is generated by the ant target "update-version" to ensure the correct
           version number in RapidMiner. */ public class Version { public static String
           getLongVersion() { return "${rapidminer.version}.${rapidminer.revision}.${rapidminer.update}"; } public static String
           getShortVersion() { return "${rapidminer.version}.${rapidminer.revision}"; } }

But this is on Base

          version number in RapidMiner. */ public class Version { public static String
           getLongVersion() { return "5.0.006"; }

Does something need to be changed in the build file?

colo

Hello,

since I'm currently working on a web mining project I would highly appreciate a new release of the WebMining extension code. There still is only version 5.0 available at sourceforge while version 5.0.2 can be used in RapidMiner since weeks. The source code of the text mining extension which I also use a lot was released with the latest update. I would be glad if there is also some chance for getting a new version of the web mining code. Is there something like this on your cue?

Best regards,
colo

fischer

Haddock,

can you look into your build.properties? Or is that file missing? The Version.java is generated from this value, ant if you build RM using ant, the Version.java should be generated appropriately.

Cheers,
Simon

fischer

Colo,

the versino on SF should be 5.0.002. It is from the ole days when the version number did not appear in the file name. (We did that once because we did not want to clutter up the files on SF).

Cheers,
Simon

haddock

Hi Simon,

Thanks for getting back to me, I've just synchronised and built, and this is the content of my Vega build properties file...

#Fri Dec 18 16:20:40 CET 2009
rapidminer.version=5
rapidminer.update=006
rapidminer.revision=0

and of course when I run that, 5.006 is the reported version although we are up to 5.008+ elsewhere. It isn't a big deal, as my extensions run fine,  but I'm not sure whether I'm actually running 5.006 or a mis-labeled 5.008.

Good weekend  ;D

colo

Hi Simon,

are you sure that SF code is 5.0.2? I had my doubts because the builded JAR file has another version number

Building jar: C:\Matthias\Workspace\Eclipse\RapidMiner_Vega\release\rapidminer-Web Mining-5.0.000.jar

This might be a forgotten version label but there is also a difference in release date. The integrated Updater says

Web Mining
5.0.2, released 16.04.2010, 1.3 MB

whereas the library on SF is labeled as follows:

rapidminer-Web Mining-5.0.jar     1.4 MB   2010-03-19   105

Greetings,
colo

fischer

Hi,

ok. If that's true, there's actually something wrong. I'll check. Thanks for reporting.

Cheers,
Simon