Hello ! Yes I also noticed the api change for the score in test_can_retrieve_docs. It seems to be more consistent (see test_can_return_all_fields which also check to float score) than before.
I also noticed that with Whoosh 2.5.6 we have 'unique_id': u'ticket:1' instead of 'unique_id': u'empty:ticket:1' in test_can_retrieve_docs. It seems to be related to the Whoosh 2.4.1 fix but I am not sure. Best regards, On 14 January 2014 09:34, Anže Starič <[email protected]> wrote: > As soon as we change the package requirements in bloodhound_search setup.py > to >5.1, new version will refuse to install if only whoosh 2.4.1 is > installed, so no installations should break. > > As far as I can tell, Whoosh 2.4 is not supported anymore. No patches have > been backported for over a year while Whoosh 2.5+ had 7 releases. I would > say that bumping the required version and removing the fixes is the way to > go. > > There is one test that fails though with Whoosh 2.5.6 > (WhooshBackendTestCase.test_can_retrieve_docs). It looks like an api change > (score used to be unicode, but is now float), but I need to check if that > is really the case. > > > Anze > > > 2014/1/14 Ryan Ollos <[email protected]> > >> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Saint Germain <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 11:45:40 -0800, Ryan Ollos >> > <[email protected]> wrote : >> > >> > > > Apparently for bloodhound_search, a specific version of Whoosh is >> > > > required (2.4.1). >> > > > >> > > > I noticed the file bloodhound_search/bhsearch/whoosh_fixes.py which >> > > > apparently fix some problem in Whoosh (pull request #41). >> > > > >> > > > Apparently this pull request is already included in Whoosh trunk >> > > > (since 2.5.1), so I was wondering if the fix is always necessary >> > > > and if Whoosh version > 2.5.1 may be acceptable. >> > > > >> > > > Is there a thread on the topic where I can understand the problem >> > > > and attempt to fix it ? >> > > > >> > > >> > > Nothing I can remember, but you may want to search: >> > > http://apache.markmail.org/search/?q=list%3Abloodhound >> > > >> > > The commit message associated with that file is "Added support for >> > > fine-grained permissions to bhsearch", so you may want to search for >> > > messages on that topic, or perhaps Anze will chime in. >> > > >> > > I encourage you to verifying the fixes, add additional tests if >> > > needed and we can bump the version in requirements to 2.5.1 if it is >> > > working well. >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > The fix was indeed very well done. There is even a test to check that >> > the fix is removed in case we don't need it anymore ! ;-) >> > >> > Now the question would be if we remove the fix or not ? >> > I hate to break previous (and working) installation, so I'd prefer to >> > keep the fix for those who want to stay with Whoosh 2.4.1. >> > However if we keep it, we may end up with some spaghetti code in >> > order to manage the different cases (depending on the Whoosh version). >> > >> > What do you advise ? >> > >> > Thanks for your help ! >> > >> >> I don't think we should try to support multiple major releases of Whoosh at >> this time. We have enough to do without testing and debugging against >> multiple versions of Whoosh. >> >> I guess the question is when is the right time to bump the required version >> of Whoosh. That may depend on a number of issues, including at least: >> features and performance of the newer versions, how long the Whoosh dev >> team will continue to support the 2.4 release line with bugfixes, Python >> version compatibility of the newer release . >>
