You just made my day with that CVS repo! :) Though I don't really get a vote -- +1 to your plan Robert.
/polishes history degree -Doug On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > I totally agree Doug. Losing the jars would have a cost: those old > branches wouldn't "work" out of box if you wanted to run tests on > them. > > But I am not sure how bad that cost really is. It might be zero. I > havent tried to run e.g. lucene 2.x tests with a modern java 7 or java > 8, but i bet they probably do not work due to things like hashmap > failures. And I think solr before 4.0 will not even compile, because > of things like wildcard import + base64 clashes. > > So if i had my preference, we'd import all history as much as we can, > and nuke the silly jars. And I'd like that sourceforge history there > too if we can get it, but I don't know if it is really legal. > > The sourceforge CVS works, see IndexWriter: > > http://lucene.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/lucene/lucene/com/lucene/index/IndexWriter.java?view=log > > > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Doug Turnbull > <dturnb...@opensourceconnections.com> wrote: > > I have no dog in the svn vs git debate honestly. > > > > I want to say how important it is to keep healthy history. I recently > went > > on a bit of code archeology dig recently to figure out why something in > > Lucene was done the way it was. It was handy that the history went as far > > back as it did, but I had to switch around to different places to > continue > > the history. For example, the abrupt shift that seems to be around when > > Solr/Lucene were put together had me digging for the last pure lucene > tag. > > Its over at lucene/java/branches NOT lucene/dev/tags with teh other tags. > > > > Then when you get to the branch for lucene-101, the first commit is: > >> 2001: New repository initialized by cvs2svn. > > > > Unable to find a cvs repo, my hunt stopped (love to hear if anyone has a > CVS > > repo -- maybe from Jakarta?) > > > > So removing some jars isn't a big deal. But cutting off history and > > restarting at some arbitrary point can be annoying and make it harder to > dig > > up more about why things are the way they are. > > > > /steps down from soapbox > > -Doug > > > > > > > > On Sunday, May 31, 2015, Dawid Weiss <dawid.we...@cs.put.poznan.pl> > wrote: > >> > >> Yeah, but it misses the point -- history is history, if there were > >> jars in it, you shouldn't just strip them, it'd be confusing. > >> > >> How was it back when Lucene was merging with Solr? Didn't it just > >> initiate with a new clean repo? Maybe not all of the history is really > >> needed -- if we limited ourselves to, say, all of the history that > >> includes ivy then the size of the repo would drop significantly... but > >> again, to me size doesn't really matter at all; one initial clone is > >> no-cost. Go make yourself a cup of tea, come back and you're set. > >> > >> Dawid > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> 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 > > -- *Doug Turnbull **| *Search Relevance Consultant | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 240.476.9983 | http://www.opensourceconnections.com Author: Relevant Search <http://manning.com/turnbull> from Manning Publications This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to be Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of whether attachments are marked as such.
