[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11490?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16211522#comment-16211522
]
Alexandre Rafalovitch commented on SOLR-11490:
----------------------------------------------
So, the problem I am trying to solve is a person using a semi-recent version of
Solr (say 6.2) and trying to understand which of the Solr components were
already available at their version and which are perhaps worth upgrading for.
And same with Lucene, I guess, but my visibility into that project as
standalone library is less clear.
To that target audience, I do not see marking of anything before - say - Solr 4
to be of significant impact. I am just trying to be complete for the sake of
completeness and because it does not take much longer. I understand we have
complexity due to separate pre-history, due to migration of Solr components
into Lucene packages and maybe more.
Therefore, as the only person with concerns so far (thank you for making time),
I am happy to address your concerns in whichever way you feel it would be
reasonable. A concrete suggestion of specific versions/classes to do in a
different way.
I can:
1) Mark pre-3.1 with their individual Solr or Lucene histories
2) I can avoid marking pre-3.1 classes all together and just lump it into the
murky back history of assumed general availability
3) I can - though would prefer not to - not mark the Lucene classes with
earlier Solr-origin versions. I would prefer not to take that route because the
functionality was clearly available, at least to Solr users.
4) Any other specific suggestion. I could not see anything specifically
relevant in LUCENE-7964 discussion
Again, this tagging does not affect anybody's code (it is just documentation),
the historical tags do not really affect anybody on Lucene/Solr 4 or later, and
whichever way you look at it, the current absence of tags is confusing by
default. I understand the point of the precedent in general, so happy to let
more experienced members of community to decide what needs to be done without
causing one.
> Add @since javadoc tags to the interesting Solr/Lucene classes
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-11490
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11490
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Reporter: Alexandre Rafalovitch
> Assignee: Alexandre Rafalovitch
> Priority: Minor
>
> As per the discussion on the dev list, it may be useful to add Javadoc since
> tags to significant (or even all) Java files.
> For user-facing files (such as analyzers, URPs, stream evaluators, etc) it
> would be useful when trying to identifying whether a particular class only
> comes later than user's particular version.
> For other classes, it may be useful for historical reasons.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
