[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2883?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12987605#action_12987605
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-2883:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
The "status" and expectations for the code are one of the big issues here -
it's not just about the technical issues of what a patch looks like. I would
expect, for example, to be able to add a feature that probably only made sense
for solr (as long as it didn't prevent lucene users from using function queries
in general of course). Is that acceptable to everyone? I would not necessarily
have the same expectation for other things in modules - it really depends on
what it is. Does that make sense?
{quote}
Do you have an example of what type of feature you are talking about? I think
it would really clarify 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]
