@Ryan: Yes, I'm clear that you're talking about trunk/5.0 The point remains though that once trunk starts down that path keeping the branches in synch becomes harder. Does the ease in development (alleged) with Java8 balance well against dealing with that divergence? Maybe so, but let's consider it carefully. It may be worth it, I'd just like a better understanding of _why_ it would be worth it.
@Robert: bq: You cannot say this. Users of lucene are API users, and supporting these language changes well are important. Why pray tell? I'm quite willing to agree that helping the developers who actually contribute code is important. That said, all I've heard so far is that Java 8 has some stuff that's cool. I'm also perfectly willing to concede that as far as committing is concerned I'm quite light-weight. If you can make an argument that the heavy-weight committer's lives would be made easier by moving to Java 8 I'm all for it. However, that case hasn't been made yet. One example has been "The ability to specify default methods on interfaces". Which has already been identified as something that's inconvenient currently, but we can cope. Seems a rather weak reason to move to Java 8. Nit pick all you like, but I'd appreciate it if you'd actually read the whole thing and reply to the overall sentiment as opposed to cherry picking a single statement and use it to obviate the entire thing. In particular I resent you pulling a single statement out of my comments and ignoring the rest. Please stop that crap. Quoting myself: bq: All _that_ said, I agree we have to move forward at some point. I'm not convinced now's the time as far as Java 8 is concerned though. I could get convinced if there were benefits like the above. But so far nobody has presented anything that really lights my fire. You completely ignored that statement and resorted to cherry-picking without replying to that statement at all. Nobody has enumerated the benefits to our end users. I provided several reasons that would make it an "easy sell" from my POV, you ignored them all. Do you really have any compelling reasons here? Maybe it would have been clearer to say "my users", or perhaps "the people I deal with who want a solution, not a playground for developers". The point remains that the end user users who are _not_ developers of Lucene/Solr are our "customers". Otherwise we're all just playing with ourselves. I'm perfectly willing to agree that serving the developers with an easier-to-maintain, faster innovation framework is good for "my users". I'm not willing to back down without someone enumerating those benefits. Yes, I'm pissed. Credit it to a long week. But please actually respond to what I write rather than make bogus arguments. On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Users don't care about lambda expressions. > > You cannot say this. Users of lucene are API users, and supporting > these language changes well are important. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
