[NLPL Task Force (A)] draft version of updated NLPL software installation guide

[Stephan Oepen]

inasmuch as i have a preference regarding the names of module
definitions, i lean towards forcing the ‘nlpl-’ prefix onto everyone
(which would mean causing yves a bit of extra work now).  i fully
share your point of view, that maintaining a clear distinction between
‘global’ and NLPL-specific software installations will be helpful.

more tomorrow!  oe


On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Tiedemann, Jörg
<jorg.tiedemann at helsinki.fi> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks, Stephan for migrating the guide to the Wiki. This is very useful.
> I quickly read though the webpage and I have no immediate suggestion. I
> guess that the recommendation about language codes is just a recommendation
> and that we can keep, for example, two-letter codes in case this is
> established for a certain resource. For example, in OPUS I use them and it
> would mean a major change in certain scripts to move to 3-letter codes (even
> though I would probably like that)
>
> About the question with module names: It is correct that I suggested the
> prefix nlpl at some point and I used that in my modules so far. I don’t know
> if it make sense and no strong opinion from my side either. My idea was to
> make a distinction between nlpl-specific modules and the ones that made it
> into the general repository of module files. It could also flag a bit our
> activities to make people aware of NLPL.
>
> The downside is that writing the nlpl prefix can be annoying and does not
> add much of a value.
> But sometimes it makes sense to use this kind of branding. And especially
> because NLPL is not very established among our colleagues this could
> actually work to make people aware of our activities?! What’s your opinion?
>
> Otherwise, for me it’s fine to announce the link.
> We also started the software catalogue:
> http://wiki.nlpl.eu/index.php/Infrastructure/software/catalogue
> Would that work as a starting point?
>
> A quick question about the placement of documentation of the OPUS activity
> on the wiki: I thought about placing it under “large corpora” even though
> this is actually another activity. But in the long run it probably makes
> sense to have it as a category below corpora and not on its own. Does that
> make sense?
>
> By the way, I thought about syncing at least the core XML files from OPUS to
> abel. Should I do that and how much space am I allowed to fill in that case?
> I can skip all the derived data sets like bitexts in different formats, word
> alignments, parsed data etc …
>
> See you soon in Oslo!
> Jörg
>
> **********************************************************************************************
> Jörg Tiedemann
> Department of Modern Languages        http://blogs.helsinki.fi/tiedeman/
> University of Helsinki
> http://blogs.helsinki.fi/language-technology/
>
>
>
>
>
> On 07 Nov 2017, at 12:44, Stephan Oepen <oe at ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>
> colleagues,
>
> the NLPL wiki was down until mid-day yesterday :-(.  i am talking to
> USIT now about avoiding longish downtimes in the future and hosting
> the wiki (and potentially other NLPL services) in a manner that makes
> it easier to migrate transparently to a replacement host, if need be.
>
> either way, i have now completed migration of the software
> installation guide to the NLPL wiki:
>
> http://wiki.nlpl.eu/index.php/Infrastructure/installation/guide
>
> i would like to announce the link to the team sometime tonight, if
> possible.  martin (and others), would you have a chance to quickly
> proof-read the updated version?
>
> i noted one missing constraints which i thought we had decided to
> enforce at the kick-off, viz. that all NLPL module definitions be
> prefixed with ‘nlpl-’, .e.g. ‘nlpl-moses’ for the Moses software.  i
> believe there may have been some follow-up discussion on slack, which
> i may have missed, and yves so far has omitted the NLPL prefix.
>
> i have no strong feelings either way; does anyone?  joerg, you had
> originally made the prefixing proposal, i believe.
>
> cheers, oe
>
>