[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7056?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15183414#comment-15183414
]
David Smiley commented on LUCENE-7056:
--------------------------------------
I think if we can't think of a better name than Geo3D, we should embrace it
despite its imperfect name. I have no better alternatives... other than
including "geom" in some way (e.g. a package) to emphasize the geometry portion
to distinguish the geometries/math from Lucene Query/Field integration.
> Spatial3d/Geo3d should have zero runtime dependencies
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7056
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7056
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: modules/spatial3d
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Assignee: David Smiley
> Fix For: 6.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE_7056__split_spatial3d_package.patch,
> LUCENE_7056__split_spatial3d_package.patch
>
>
> This is a proposal for the "spatial3d" module to be purely about the
> shape/geometry implementations it has. In Lucene 5 that's actually all it
> has. In Lucene 6 at the moment its ~76 files have 2 classes that I think
> should go elsewhere: Geo3DPoint and PointInGeo3DShapeQuery. Specifically
> lucene-spatial-extras (which doesn't quite exist yet so lucene-spatial) would
> be a suitable place due to the dependency. _Eventually_ I see this module
> migrating elsewhere be it on its own or a part of something else more
> spatial-ish. Even if that never comes to pass, non-Lucene users who want to
> use this module for it's geometry annoyingly have to exclude the Lucene
> dependencies that are there because this module also contains these two
> classes.
> In a comment I'll suggest some specifics.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
