Anshum (the RM): I believe the release process includes instructions on transitioning Jira "resolved" status to "closed". I see Lucene 7.0 issues not yet marked closed; maybe others. This sort of thing happens often, I think... I wonder if we have any value in even having a distinction if it gets forgotten and not often noticed.
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:36 PM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com> wrote: > Now with docs in git this should be within reach with some discipline! > If we don’t manage to get the official refGuide released simultaneously > it’d be just one hour of work to convert the "Major Changes in Solr X” > refguide page into a blog post that could be published on the CMS? > > PS: I just updated the “About versions” section of > http://lucene.apache.org/solr/community.html > This should probably be part of the RM instructions? > > Another observation is that the release announcement mail > should be formatted with a max line length of 75 or something, > to format nicely in ASCII format. > > Congrats on the release, everyone! > > -- > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > > 20. sep. 2017 kl. 21.29 skrev Cassandra Targett <casstarg...@gmail.com>: > > Hijacking this thread a little bit now that Anshum has what he needs > to release...I wanted to clarify my earlier point about the Ref Guide > being in sync with the release notes. > > I'd like to see us evolve from our current model of Release Notes -> > CHANGES.txt and provide an intermediary level of information geared to > those upgrading. What I wish we could have done is add a link in the > release notes to the upgrade notes in the Ref Guide instead of > directing people to CHANGES. > > In order to do this, though, the Ref Guide needs to be released at > just about the same time. Docs shouldn't be something that starts when > someone proposes a release, but instead is considered a critical part > of the actual release. I think most of us nod our heads at that idea, > but when a vote thread starts, we should be looking for typos instead > of still chasing down information that could have been written/updated > when the code change was made. > > People still need CHANGES.txt for their detailed upgrade planning. But > we can do more to help them make initial plans for their upgrades > without overwhelming them with detail. And, of course, with a major > release like 7.0, it would be nice if they had documentation to go > with it instead of waiting another X weeks. > > Enough of my soapbox - I hope by the time 8.0 is ready to go out we > are able to publish the Ref Guide with the release. I thought now > might be a good time to plug for it. > > Cassandra > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote: > > I’ve added a note about the analytics component, and restructured the > points. > > Thanks to everyone and please don’t make any more changes as I’m adding > these to the news section and committing now. > > -Anshum > > > > On Sep 20, 2017, at 10:30 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote: > > +1 on keeping that section. I just read it wrong I guess, and assumed you > wanted to remove that section. > > -Anshum > > > > On Sep 20, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think we should keep all the typical wording around upgrades. I'm just > suggesting an arrangement of the highlights section. > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote: > > > Joel, I was actually asking if you meant removing the following section: > > Being a major release, Solr 7 removes many deprecated APIs, changes > various parameter defaults and > behavior. Some changes may require a re-index of your content. You are > thus encouraged to thoroughly > read the "Upgrade Notes" at > http://lucene.apache.org/solr/7_0_0/changes/Changes.html or in the > CHANGES.txt file accompanying the release. > > > Uwe: I am ready with all my (website) changes, and just waiting on the > Solr ‘news’ section that is a subset of the release notes. From the looks > of > it, we are done with the changes, and I can copy the relevant sections and > commit the website changes. So yes, the release would happen on the 20th :) > > -Anshum > > > > On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release. > So leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing > people of changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in > CHANGES.txt. > > What do other people think about this? > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote: > > > Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide > for 7.0 would be released soon. > > -Anshum > > > > On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote: > > Sounds good. > > Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me > know if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part. > > David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release > notes and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s > important/reasonable > enough to highlight in the release notes. > > -Anshum > > > > On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the > most interesting features. > > If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a > maintenance release. > > > Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs, > pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML > format. > > > > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I just made the edit. > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > For streaming expressions let's go with: > > Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax > for > the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series > and > graph result sets. > > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ > LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote: > > > Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending > in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things > on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new > release > is important I think. > > -Christine > > * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming > syntax for > the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series > and > graph result sets. > > * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9 > > From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54 > To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) , dev@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts > > This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun > pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions > (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :). > > -Anshum > > > > On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) > <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote: > > Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release! > > Below is the revised draft I came up with: > > (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to > mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we > mention that /solr/ continues to work.) > > (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the > used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation > which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet > refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly > longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is > auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica > types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is > Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.) > > Solr 7.0 Release Highlights: > > * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs, > pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML > format. > > * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is > now the > preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work. > > * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at > collection > creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes > strings as > analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field > suitable for > faceting. > > * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure > accurate > counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode. > > * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which > handle updates > differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas > build an > index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL > replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a > master/slave > setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy. > > * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a > new auto > scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases > enable Solr > to move shards around based on load, disk etc. > > * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9. > > From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38 > To: dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts > > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com> > wrote: > > > And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not > adding random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 > bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other > bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet > instead of adding more. Agree? > > > > I agree with that very much! Each bullet added de-values the list as > a whole. IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it > yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. > -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com