[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2034?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12898391#action_12898391
]
Hoss Man commented on SOLR-2034:
--------------------------------
+1 to the patch
My only concern is upgrade compatibility -- it would be preferable if people
upgrading either Solr or their SolrJ client (but not both at the exact same
moment) would still have a functioning system.
As i recall, the BinaryResponseWriter / Parser use a version param and version
metadata in the response (just like the XmlResponseWriter) to indicate the
codec version requested and the code version returned -- this seems like the
kind of thing that should probably warrant a new coden impl with a new version
number.
that said: i didn't follow the details of the binary response writer / parser /
codec implementation very closely, so i have no idea how hard it will be to
make it all work smoothly for people: if it's a pain in the ass then i'm
totally fine with saying that SolrJ 3.x can't talk to Solr 1.x (and vice versa)
... but we should still probably update the binary code version info to make it
clear there is a difference
> javabin should use UTF-8, not modified UTF-8
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-2034
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2034
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: SOLR-2034.patch
>
>
> for better interoperability, javabin should use standard UTF-8 instead of
> modified UTF-8 (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr26/)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
