So it just occurred to me to ask why stop with renaming? We're going around the loop again of "wouldn't it be nice to edit the configs from a GUI". Or "a collections like API to manage configs on Zookeeper". That got me to wondering if XML is really doing us any favors at this point. NOTE: To even suggest this I must be smoking something, but would another format avoid that problem? I freely admit I have no clue, but...
Whether it's even possible or not to express what we do in the configs in, say, JSON I don't know. And whether JSON (or whatever) would avoid the security issues I also don't know. My gut feel is that it's a massive amount of work and nobody in their right mind would tackle it, the rewards are too small for the effort. But I wanted to throw it out there. On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > Then make it accept two names, and start shipping examples with the new > name. Old stuff works, new stuff makes sense. > > Upayavira > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015, at 08:47 PM, Mark Miller wrote: > > It is the wrong name - mostly because it came from a single core solution. > We could change it, but you have to pretty carefully consider how heavily > it's embedded out there now. > > - Mark > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:20 PM Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > > On 7/9/2015 10:55 AM, Erick Erickson wrote: >> coreconfig.xml has it's own problems in SolrCloud, >> collectionconfig seems better. Except in that case >> stand-alone Solr doesn't really use collections... >> >> Siiggghhh. > > I debated with myself on whether I even wanted to bring this up. > Ultimately I decided it would be interesting to discuss, even if we > don't take any action. > > As potential replacements for solrconfig.xml, I find that core.xml or > possibly just config.xml are the most appealing ... but the former might > be confusing in a SolrCloud context. I'm biased towards cores, because > the Solr indexes that I interact with most often are NOT using > SolrCloud, and might never use it. I've heard rumblings about SolrCloud > becoming the *only* running mode, but that hasn't happened so far. > > I understand how we got where we are today -- in the early days, Solr > only handled one index, so the solrconfig.xml actually did configure all > of Solr. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > -- > - Mark > about.me/markrmiller > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
