[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4399?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13469749#comment-13469749
]
Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-4399:
--------------------------------------
bq. I dont its a goal to check that they are really consistent? Really we can
remove this check.
I actually started to like it. :-) Having two different version numbers in the
headers of these files would mean that something went really wrong...
bq. This was a bug in this stuff before (LUCENE-3621).
I agree that codec names should never be shared, but I don't think this is a
problem for version numbers.
I started this discussion because I was surprised of the {{indexVersion ==
version}} test, but this is a detail, I think it is nice not to seek when it is
not necessary so I am +1 for this patch.
bq. we can deprecate/remove appending codec, we should just keep its test.
+1 for moving AppendingCodec from lucene-codecs to test-framework too
> Rename AppendingCodec to Appending40Codec
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4399
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4399
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Adrien Grand
> Assignee: Adrien Grand
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 4.1
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4399.patch, LUCENE-4399.patch, LUCENE-4399.patch
>
>
> In order AppendingCodec to follow Lucene codecs version, I think its name
> should include a version number (so that, for example, if we get to releave
> Lucene 4.3 with a new Lucene43Codec, there will also be a new
> Appending43Codec).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
