[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2883?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12987162#action_12987162
]
Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-2883:
-----------------------------------------
{quote}
I'm not against modularizing some solr functionality so lucene users can use
it, but hopefully you understand why I think it should retain the solr package
namespace and be a solr module (or at a minimum perhaps a lucene/solr module).
It just wouldn't be fair to downgrade solr support for such a large core piece
of solr, and have people cry foul when something is added that only solr can
benefit from (as is done fairly regularly today since it's just part of solr).
{quote}
I don't give a sh.. about the package name - /modules is shared space - some
is more luceneish some is more solrish. I also think that bwcomap is not a
super big deal with modules either. Why don't we get a proposal patch wise and
see how that goes... Still - the concerns are super minor IMO and should not
keep us from making progress on the modularization side of things.
> 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/[email protected]/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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
