As a Lucene.Net user I wouldn't care whether it is line-by-line port or not.
But as a contributer, I would prefer a parallel code that makes the life easier for manual ports of new releases(until this process is automated) PS: I presume no one thinks of functional or index-level incompatibility. DIGY -----Original Message----- From: Granroth, Neal V. [mailto:neal.granr...@thermofisher.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 10:47 PM To: lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org Cc: lucene-net-...@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Is a Lucene.Net Line-by-Line Jave port needed? This is has been discussed many times. Lucene.NET is not valid, the code cannot be trusted, if it is not a line-by-line port. It ceases to be Lucene. - Neal -----Original Message----- From: Scott Lombard [mailto:lombardena...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 1:58 PM To: lucene-net-...@lucene.apache.org; lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org Subject: [Lucene.Net] Is a Lucene.Net Line-by-Line Jave port needed? After the large community response about moving the code base from .Net 2.0 to Net 4.0 I am trying to figure out what is the need for a line-by-line port. Starting with Digy's excellent work on the conversion to generics a priority of the 2.9.4g release is the 2 packages would not be interchangeable. So faster turnaround from a java release won't matter to non line-by-line users they will have to wait until the updates are made to the non line-by-line code base. My question is there really a user base for the line-by-line port? Anyone have a comment? Scott
