A GUI is just one of the multiple interfaces through which a user may interact with Solr. The API is more important.
We are starting to move Solr from a config file based system to an API based system where all that you wish to change in a system is accessible through the API (I am talking about the config/schema API). Building a UI is not necessarily important. On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 > -- ----------------------------------------------------- Noble Paul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
