[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2883?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12986561#action_12986561
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-2883:
--------------------------------------
Not sure if I communicated the issue clearly: taking what is essentially
implementation and trying to make it interface clearly has a cost.
Function queries and the solr qparser architecture are constantly evolving, and
wind all through solr.
If we attempt to make this easier to use by lucene users by moving it out to a
module then:
- it should be a solr module... keep the solr package names and make it clear
that it's primary purpose is supporting higher level features in solr
- we should make it such that java interface back compatibility is not a
requirement, even for point releases
The other approach is to make a Lucene function query module (actually, we
already have that), try to update it with stuff from solr, but make it's
primary purpose to support the Java interfaces.
> Consolidate Solr & Lucene FunctionQuery into modules
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2883
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2883
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Search
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Simon Willnauer
> Fix For: 4.0
>
>
> Spin-off from the [dev list |
> http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@lucene.apache.org/msg13261.html]
--
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
