On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:02 PM Doug Turnbull < [email protected]> wrote:
> As more of a practioner/user of Solr, I would second a desire to have more > review involved in what gets added. I am sometimes surprised at features > that have gotten added with minimal review that feel fairly experimental or > impact stability. I don't think it's anything against the people working on > the features, as a sometimes contributor, I too have not fully thought out > all the implications, big and small, of my desired changes. I have been > rather impressed how much my contribution has improved when a > committer (namely Mr. Smiley, who is an incredible human being) has helped > review & shephard the change. > I don't think this has anything to do with code review: it has to do with people just piling in features, but not taking the time to do any janitorial work or remove old features that shouldn't be there anymore (I AM LOOKING AT YOU HDFS) Solr really must *remove features* from time to time, and then refactor the code to remove any hacks those features brought in, like a normal software project. So instead of adding a bunch of policy, it might be a better idea to directly attack the problem of piling up features, maybe declare a moratorium on new features for a while, remove some outdated ones, and do some long overdue cleanup.
