[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14079922#comment-14079922
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-5859:
---------------------------------------
I think we should all calm down here. We are all strong personalities, so it is
always a bit hard if different opinions crush against each other. I had the
same problem today in LUCENE-5850, two different opinions. Yes, I am now
disappointed, because I spent hard work on the issue and instead of looking at
the key parts of the patch and the process of moving forward and improving the
stuff, only quibbling around stupid ALPHA/BETA versions was the response - just
disappointing. I just stopped working on the issue and maybe I will work on it
tomorrow, just maybe.
We should stop heavy committing here and all calm down!
bq. Veto must have technical justification. Good luck with the technical
justification of me not removing dead code.
There is indeed a technical justification: The Version parameter may be useless
now, but once we add new features to StandardAnalyzer, the Version parameter
gets useful again, so we need to re-add it - leading to the known backwards
problems. This again brings the problem that uses, who started at 5.0 will not
have a defined value for it in 5.1 and then we have problems. In my personal
opinion, every Analyzer must have the Version parameter mandatory.
On the other hand I know the problems with the mandatory parameter. I have seen
users tripping in the same trap like without the parameter: Once they upgrade
Lucene, they just search/replace every occurence of the old Version parameter,
just to get the "latest and best features" (documentation) and to remove
deprecations, because all previous versions are deprecated. But they don't
reindex - and boom they have the same problem like without the parameter. So it
had no good effect. Other projects like Elasticsearch don't care about the
version parameter. They have a global static constant in every release. Users
just upgrade - boom, same problem.
In my opinion, the documentation is much too general. We should only ever use
Version in the analyzers. Version should also be only part of the Analyzers
module, not Lucene core. In my opinion - and I agree with Robert - it is only
useful there! And in the analysis moudle it should be correctly documented, why
it is there and what it does. And why it is wrong to just use the latest and
best without reindexing.
> Remove Version.java completely
> ------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5859
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 5.0
>
>
> This has always been a mess: analyzers are easy enough to make on your own,
> we don't need to "take responsibility" for the users analysis chain for 2
> major releases.
> The code maintenance is horrible here.
> This creates a huge usability issue too, and as seen from numerous mailing
> list issues, users don't even understand how this versioning works anyway.
> I'm sure someone will whine if i try to remove these constants, but we can at
> least make no-arg ctors forwarding to VERSION_CURRENT so that people who
> don't care about back compat (e.g. just prototyping) don't have to deal with
> the horribly complex versioning system.
> If you want to make the argument that doing this is "trappy" (i heard this
> before), i think thats bogus, and ill counter by trying to remove them.
> Either way, I'm personally not going to add any of this kind of back compat
> logic myself ever again.
> Updated: description of the issue updated as expected. We should remove this
> API completely. No one else on the planet has APIs that require a mandatory
> version parameter.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
