[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4012?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13265919#comment-13265919
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4012:
-------------------------------------
I think if it works for you, just iterate in your github and ping the issue
when you make progress?
Otherwise we worry too much about where/how the code sits when that isn't
really so important
at this stage.
As far as final integration, I think there are a number of ways to do it but
its really
unrelated to making progress here. One suggestion might be to split
queryparser/ module
like analyzers/ so we have:
* classic/ [including things based on it: complexPhrase, ext, analyzing]
* flexible/ [including precedence which is based on it]
* xml/
* json/
This could probably make things less confusing, as currently queryparser/ is a
mix of
different frameworks with different dependencies (e.g. xml depends on queries/
and sandbox/,
but the others dont, and json will depend on jackson and maybe other stuff,
etc, etc).
And then finally, probably a followup issue to do solr integration (i'm more
fuzzy on that).
> Make all query classes serializable with Jackson, and provide a trivial query
> parser to consume them
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4012
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4012
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: core/queryparser
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Benson Margulies
> Attachments: bq.patch
>
>
> I started off on LUCENE-4004 wanting to use DisjunctionMaxQuery via a parser.
> However, this wasn't really because I thought that human beans should be
> improvisationally composing such thing. My real goal was to concoct a query
> tree over *here*, and then serialize it to send to Solr over *there*.
> It occurs to me that if the Xml parser is pretty good for this, JSON would be
> better. It further occurs to me that the query classes may already all work
> with Jackson, and, if they don't, the required tweaks will be quite small. By
> allowing Jackson to write out class names as needed, you get the ability to
> serialize *any* query, so long as the other side has the classes in class
> path. A trifle verbose, but not as verbose as XML, and furthermore squishable
> (though not in a URL) via SMILE or BSON.
> So, the goal of this JIRA is to accumulate tweaks to the query classes to
> make them more 'bean pattern'. An alternative would be Jackson annotations.
> However, I suspect that folks would be happier to minimize the level of
> coupling here; in the extreme, the trivial parser could live in contrib if no
> one wants a dependency, even optional, on Jackson itself.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
