I hope that doesn’t sound too negative, “clinging” never sounds as positive as I’d like and I do negative plenty well without doing it by accident. Not a pessimistic statement though, I made it even better than I was planning or remembering I could or however that works. Resistance is built into the equation - this isn’t rock and roll, I’m a science bachelor. Though only a small few liberal arts classes made me go, so I wouldn’t trust the cert myself. Anyway, I learned from multiple Star Wars movies what to do here, you have to setup an ambush on the trench run and then just make the thing look like a huge black star.
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 4:38 AM Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > There are already so many conflicts, you will cry and then realize there > are more. Even worse, some things have been changed due to their > cost/benefit failings, things that someone, somewhere, will cling to like a > life vest. > > The ref branch waits for no man, and expects the same. > > It lives on ridiculous speed and stability and throws mergability to the > crows. > > It could not be merged into anything and survive, but it can absorb > anything, as long as it behaves like a boss or can be jostled into doing > so. So fear not for the fearless. You can’t let a specter freeze the > tireless day to day shifting and shuffling of names and rules and > locations. I swear, enough lucky shifts and this thing can rise to meet the > living. I’ve seen it see dead people. > > End of the day, if the ref branch can’t survive even a large and lengthy > divergence, if that is the freeze in its tracks, it’s not at all what I’ve > said ive been working on and so does it even matter? > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 9:39 AM Jason Gerlowski <gerlowsk...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I'm fine with standardization, whichever convention we choose. I have >> a slight preference for FooTest, for the same reason Gus mentioned, >> but any standard is better than none here IMO. >> >> > prefer that we not make a sweeping change like this until after Mark's >> "ref branch" is reconciled >> >> Personally I disagree about the need to wait. It'd be one thing if >> there was an agreed-upon plan or a timeframe for merging "ref-branch". >> But since that's not the case today, I don't think it makes sense to >> ignore concrete/mergeable improvements. It seems like a "bird in the >> hand vs two in the bush" situation. Especially when there are >> strategies for handling the conflicts that might arise with Mark's >> "ref-branch" (e.g. do the test renames on both master and ref_impl). >> >> Jason >> >> On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 12:44 PM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > I look forward to a standardization on *something* but would prefer >> that we not make a sweeping change like this until after Mark's "ref >> branch" is reconciled. I don't want that to hang over the project >> indefinitely, but we can wait; we've not had this standardization yet for >> many years, after all. >> > >> > That said, it would be good to choose the standard name now so that >> there is less to change later. Can someone dig up the statistics on Solr's >> name choice to see if there is a clear winner (e.g. >60%)? I don't have a >> strong opinion on whatever the standard should be so long as there is a >> standard :-) >> > >> > >> > ~ David Smiley >> > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 12:18 PM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> FWIW, I'm not really in favor of the convention Lucene adopted. I >> probably lost track of the debate and failed to object which is on me, but >> I guess it was because that was the lower number of changes there? It's >> certainly much less legible in the IDE to have a wall of classes all >> starting with T. Maybe given that the projects are splitting Solr can Stick >> with FooTest not TestFoo? I think *Test suffix is more common in Solr... >> (though I haven't attempted to quantify it) >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 12:05 PM Eric Pugh < >> ep...@opensourceconnections.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Makes sense to me. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Feb 20, 2021, at 2:42 PM, Marcus Eagan <marcusea...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi all, >> >>> >> >>> Now that Lucene’s standardization is complete and I believe enforced, >> should we discuss if we could bring the same consistency to Solr? >> >>> >> >>> Best, >> >>> >> >>> Marcus >> >>> -- >> >>> Marcus Eagan >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________ >> >>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC | >> 434.466.1467 | http://www.opensourceconnections.com | My Free/Busy >> >>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed >> >>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to >> be Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of >> whether attachments are marked as such. >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >> >> http://www.the111shift.com (play) >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> -- > - Mark > > http://about.me/markrmiller > -- - Mark http://about.me/markrmiller
