I think the problem here is that the file was not renamed in SVN. As patches
in JIRA normally do not contain the rename (because they cannot applied with
all actions like renames automatically done), I think the rename got lost.
Renames only work correct, if the person who did the rename in his
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12719940#action_12719940
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1673:
---
bq. re: NumericField - it wouldn't have
Uwe is right! As long as you us diffs (patches) and have any kind of
svn cp / svn mv done to you repository the will not be
reflected in the diff. I don't think that there is any way of doing
this currently except of the committer is doing it by hand (again)
when applying the patch.
This is
The problem is, when you applied the patch, the files are already
deleted/created by patch2 and the SVN client is loosing the move operation
(he only sees a new unversioned file and one missing file). As your link
notes, you cannot replay the changes already done (by the patch command). So
the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1630?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Shai Erera updated LUCENE-1630:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-1630.patch
Changed Query.createQueryWeight to public, as was suggested by Yonik.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1504?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler reassigned LUCENE-1504:
-
Assignee: Uwe Schindler
Hllo Ryan,
I will try to get this into 2.9, but before some
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1504?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720014#action_12720014
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1504:
---
And other things:
- Use a
AttributeSource/TokenStream API improvements
Key: LUCENE-1693
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: Analysis
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch updated LUCENE-1693:
--
Attachment: lucene-1693.patch
Patch that includes all mentioned improvements, but needs
I'm afraid this was my bad -- I blindly applied the patch and svn
deleted the 0 byte files and failed to manually do the svn move
instead.
I believe the trunk version of svn includes an svn patch command
(that is sorely needed). It'd fix this as well as eg forgetting to
svn add new files in a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1630?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless reassigned LUCENE-1630:
--
Assignee: Michael McCandless
Mating Collector and Scorer on doc Id orderness
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720031#action_12720031
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1693:
---
Why do you add a new class SmallToken? I
Seems reasonable?
So you're saying that if a Field has both TokenStream and some other
value, the TokenStream gets indexed into postings term vectors, but
the other value gets stored?
Mike
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Yonik Seeleyyo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
The JavaDoc suggests that
Yes, I exactly need this for NumericField! The numeric value gets indexed
using the tokenStream, but an optional stored field value (e.g. the number
as plain text or even prefixEncoded) would also be good. Currently the user
must index both types separate (but can use the same field name). As far
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720046#action_12720046
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1693:
---
{quote}
Why do you add a new class
Probably everyone is thinking right now Oh no! Not again!. I admit I
didn't fully read the incredibly long recent thread about
backwards-compatibility, so maybe what I'm about to propose has been
proposed already. In that case my apologies in advance.
Rather than discussing our current
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720052#action_12720052
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1693:
---
{quote}
bq. What was your concusion about
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720054#action_12720054
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1673:
Patch looks good Uwe! The only
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720052#action_12720052
]
Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-1693 at 6/16/09 3:43 AM:
OK let's do it then... Yonik do you want to open issue, patch, etc.?
We should spell this out clearly in the javadocs that this case
(tokenStream + string/binary value) is handled specially, because
this does break from Field's normal semantics.
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Uwe
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720056#action_12720056
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1673:
---
What do you think about deprecating
Maybe we should also add ctors to Field, with TokenStream and String/binary
that set Field.Store.YES (compress is deprecated, so no need to support).
-
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
-Original Message-
From:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720060#action_12720060
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1693:
---
{quote}
- If somebody implements the new
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720066#action_12720066
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1693:
---
{quote}
What if you currently have a filter
Since I proposed the same changes (
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Lucene%27s-default-settings---back-compatibility-p23792927.html),
I can only give my +1 to all 4 :).
On the other thread I also proposed to change the policy around changing
default settings. But maybe we should take it one step at a
Query#mergeBooleanQueries argument should be of type BooleanQuery[] instead of
Query[]
--
Key: LUCENE-1694
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1694
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720076#action_12720076
]
Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-1693:
I have a couple of TokenFilters that work that
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Willnauer updated LUCENE-1694:
Priority: Minor (was: Major)
Query#mergeBooleanQueries argument should be of type
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720081#action_12720081
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1693:
---
If you clone, you would not fall into the
That sounds good.
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Uwe Schindleru...@thetaphi.de wrote:
Maybe we should also add ctors to Field, with TokenStream and String/binary
that set Field.Store.YES (compress is deprecated, so no need to support).
-
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63,
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720082#action_12720082
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1673:
I think deprecating DateTools
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720084#action_12720084
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1673:
bq. NumericField would only work
+1 to all 4.
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Michael Buschbusch...@gmail.com wrote:
Probably everyone is thinking right now Oh no! Not again!. I admit I
didn't fully read the incredibly long recent thread about
backwards-compatibility, so maybe what I'm about to propose has been
+1 to all 4.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Michael
McCandlessluc...@mikemccandless.com wrote:
+1 to all 4.
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Michael Buschbusch...@gmail.com wrote:
Probably everyone is thinking right now Oh no! Not again!. I admit I
didn't fully read the incredibly
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720089#action_12720089
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1673:
---
bq. Actually, this need not be a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Willnauer updated LUCENE-1694:
Attachment: Query_mergeBooleanQueries.patch
Attached patch + testcase.
The patch passes
Update the Highlighter to use the new TokenStream API
-
Key: LUCENE-1695
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1695
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Improvement
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1695?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mark Miller updated LUCENE-1695:
Attachment: LUCENE-1695.patch
Rough, non backward compat patch.
There is still an issue with
Just to cat call from the corner over here:
So unless you update on *every* minor release, from a users perspective,
this is the same as tossing out API back compat (though still with the
option to keep what we want around as long as we want) ?
Michael Busch wrote:
Probably everyone is
Yep, it's also useful for pre-analyzing text.
Wish I had it way back when I started Solr (to avoid an unneccessary
pass through the analyzer, I actually stored and indexed the number in
transformed but untokenized form... not great for Luke :-)
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Tue, Jun
+1 on everything. This is the sanity we need, especially #2. Thanks
for bringing this up again.
I'd add a slight mod to #2 that I think helps further communicate to
users our expectations (marked by my initials GSI) by employing some
convention in our @deprecated comments:
2.
I'd be interested in what the users list has to say.
With this many +1's, seems reasonable to take it over there.
- Mark
Grant Ingersoll wrote:
+1 on everything. This is the sanity we need, especially #2. Thanks
for bringing this up again.
I'd add a slight mod to #2 that I think helps
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless reassigned LUCENE-1694:
--
Assignee: Michael McCandless
Query#mergeBooleanQueries argument should be of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720139#action_12720139
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1694:
Patch looks good, thanks Simon.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless resolved LUCENE-1694.
Resolution: Fixed
Thank Simon!
Query#mergeBooleanQueries argument should be of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720143#action_12720143
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1673:
bq. I only wanted to hear one
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless reassigned LUCENE-1692:
--
Assignee: Michael McCandless
Contrib analyzers need tests
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless updated LUCENE-1692:
---
Fix Version/s: 2.9
Contrib analyzers need tests
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720144#action_12720144
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1692:
These are much needed... thanks
Lucene could really make use of this method. When a segment merge
takes place, we can read write many GB of data, which without
madvise on many OSs would effectively flush the IO cache (thus hurting
our search performance).
Mike
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Jason
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1313?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720147#action_12720147
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1313:
{quote}
I think this is
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1313?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720148#action_12720148
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1313:
bq. conditionalize them to run
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720152#action_12720152
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1673:
---
With a NumericTermQuery you would only hit
But to use it, we should change MMapDirectory to also use the mapping when
writing to files. I thought about it, it is very simple to implement (just
copy the IndexInput and change all gets() to sets())
-
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720154#action_12720154
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1692:
-
Michael: LUCENE-973 would save me from having
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Willnauer updated LUCENE-1696:
Attachment: ASCIIFoldingFilter._newTokenAPI.patch
all tests pass
Added New Token API
Added New Token API impl for ASCIIFoldingFilter
---
Key: LUCENE-1696
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Improvement
Components:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720163#action_12720163
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-1673:
--
bq. We could easily add numeric; then
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720169#action_12720169
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-973:
So the latest patch is ready to go in? I guess I
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1377?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720171#action_12720171
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1377:
Robert, would ICUTokenizer
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720173#action_12720173
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1696:
-
Simon, I think if you want to handle accents in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1377?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720175#action_12720175
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1377:
-
they are a bit different.
for example:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720177#action_12720177
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-973:
---
I'll take it Mark! Fixes a bug and
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless reassigned LUCENE-973:
-
Assignee: Michael McCandless
Token of returns in CJKTokenizer + new
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720183#action_12720183
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1696:
-
i uploaded a testcase under LUCENE-1581 showing
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720189#action_12720189
]
Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-1696:
-
bq. i don't see an alternative,
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mark Miller reassigned LUCENE-1696:
---
Assignee: Mark Miller
Added New Token API impl for ASCIIFoldingFilter
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1486?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mark Miller reassigned LUCENE-1486:
---
Assignee: Mark Miller
Wildcards, ORs etc inside Phrase queries
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Robert Muir updated LUCENE-1696:
Attachment: TestGermanCollation.java
show how to do this with german... its a bit more involved
MoreLikeThis should use the new Token API
-
Key: LUCENE-1697
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1697
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: Grant Ingersoll
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720192#action_12720192
]
Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-1696:
-
Thanks robert,
I did know about
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720191#action_12720191
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1673:
{quote}
bq. We could easily add
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720193#action_12720193
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1696:
-
simon, actually i think its documented you can
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720196#action_12720196
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1693:
---
But, the additional copying would affect
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720197#action_12720197
]
Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-1696:
-
bq. simon, actually i think its
Wow this is *very* similar! :)
On 6/16/09 4:29 AM, Shai Erera wrote:
Since I proposed the same changes
(http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Lucene%27s-default-settings---back-compatibility-p23792927.html),
I can only give my +1 to all 4 :).
On the other thread I also proposed to change the policy
Except, you don't know the size of the file to be written upfront.
One probable solution is to map output file in pages. As a
complementary solution you can map a huge area of the file, and hope
few real memory is allocated by OS unless you actually write all over
that area.
Dunno. The idea of
Sounds good, Grant. I'll open a task to change the policy with target
release=3.0.
Michael
On 6/16/09 6:53 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
+1 on everything. This is the sanity we need, especially #2. Thanks
for bringing this up again.
I'd add a slight mod to #2 that I think helps further
Oh yes! Again!
+1
One point is missing. What about incompatible behavioral changes that
do not touch API and file format?
Like posIncr=0 at the first token in stream, or analyzer fixes, or
something along these lines.
Are we free to introduce them in a minor release without warning, or
are we
Fair enough. We certainly want our users to understand our reasons for
these changes, and keep their trust that we're making our best efforts
to keep upgrading as effortless as possible.
However, there will always be someone who is not happy with such a
change. But if the vast majority of the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720200#action_12720200
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-973:
---
Does anyone know if the added
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1696?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720201#action_12720201
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1696:
-
since this seems to be a recurring theme maybe
So under this proposal, what's the difference between a major and minor release?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Michael Buschbusch...@gmail.com wrote:
Probably everyone is thinking right now Oh no! Not again!. I admit I
didn't fully read the
I'd suggest to treat a runtime change like an API change (unless it's
fixing a bug of course),
i.e. giving a warning, providing a switch, switching the default
behavior only after a major
or minor release was around that had the warning/switch.
Michael
On 6/16/09 8:54 AM, Earwin Burrfoot
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720204#action_12720204
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-973:
sounds like another good test case, add a few
Hmm... posix_fadvise lets you do this with a file descriptor; this
would be better for Lucene (per descriptor not per mapped region of
RAM) since we could advise independent of which FSDir impl is in
use...
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Uwe Schindleru...@thetaphi.de wrote:
But to use
Index back-compat is guaranteed to hold within minor releases.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidimagination.comwrote:
So under this proposal, what's the difference between a major and minor
release?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at
Right - I'm not saying that the users should trump the devs, just
curious what the response will be, if any.
I also think that when we update the back compat policy, there should be
wording that stresses where we should use our new powers carefully (eg
common API's and such).
And we should
From a backwards-compatibility point of view, nothing really.
Michael
On 6/16/09 8:59 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
So under this proposal, what's the difference between a major and minor release?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Michael
Ahh ... I wish I had finished
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Lucene%27s-default-settings---back-compatibility-p23792927.htmlwith
+1 of my own. Guess that's what was missing to get it to closure :).
Shai
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Michael Busch busch...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd suggest to treat
Yeah, the only difference now is that we can remove deprecated APIs. And
I guess we add nothing.
Which is, as Micahel has said, is goofy.
3.0 will be 2.9 like 1.9 was 2.0. Without deprecations.
Not a big deal at all, but I find it goofy too.
- Mark
Michael Busch wrote:
From a
Well I'd actually hope that there will be significantly less need to do
these tricks to get around the new policy.
I'll open a JIRA issue and we can use it to work on the exact wording.
Michael
On 6/16/09 9:03 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
Right - I'm not saying that the users should trump the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720207#action_12720207
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-973:
---
Well, my question is: is there any
I would guess you hit what I call thread fatigue by the time you
summed that up :)
Michael hasn't been around for a bit - perhaps it was easier for him to
spawn a new thread.
Also, much shorter text to read :)
Shai Erera wrote:
Ahh ... I wish I had finished
Change backwards-compatibility policy
-
Key: LUCENE-1698
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1698
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Michael Busch
Also, much shorter text to read :)
You're right, Michael's is 484 words, mine was 691. But in my defense, I did
offer two more changes, that were later brought up on this thread (summing
to 563 words) :).
Anyway, I'm glad it's kept alive and hopefully things will change.
Shai
On Tue, Jun 16,
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720212#action_12720212
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-973:
Michael i don't see anything obvious, but a test
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless updated LUCENE-973:
--
Attachment: LUCENE-973.patch
Or... how about we just switch to iteration not
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720222#action_12720222
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1693:
bq. What do you or others think
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12720223#action_12720223
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-1673:
--
bq. But we are already baking in the trie
1 - 100 of 180 matches
Mail list logo
