On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote: > I think this needs a bit more explanation. AIUI, the primary cause for > concern is that by making something a module, you are taking a private, > internal API of Solr's and now making it a public API that must be maintained > (and backwards maintained) which could slow down development as one now needs > to be concerned with more factors than you would if it were merely an > implementation detail in Solr. >
Can we solve this? It seems like for lucene users, they currently only have this choice: A. no access to feature X at all but, couldn't they at least have this choice: A. no access to feature X at all B. having access to some feature, but it has relaxed backwards compatibility to address the concern. In other words, we could mark the api @experimental or whatever, and the user can choose not to use it from a lucene level if they don't want to deal with upgrade hassles. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
