On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Shai Erera <[email protected]> wrote:
> You're probably right. The thing is, some facet tests rely on the data > that exists in the facet examples. The reason is that the examples already > contain some large number of documents and facets, so it was easy to test > certain features (I think TotalFacetCounts) with large set of documents, > without duplicating the information. > > Is it necessary, probably not, but that's the current state of affairs. I > tend to agree that facet examples should be under demo/. It's just that I'm > not willing to lose facet (core) tests, or otherwise, the facet tests would > need to depend on demo ... is it bad? > > Really, currently the facet examples build are half broken. The > facet/build.xml takes care to generate the facet-examples.jar, compile them > and test them. The only piece that was removed, from what I can tell by > accident, are the javadocs ... > > You know that I always prefer to get to a consensus before opening an > issue, but I want to get this fixed. It was my mistake that I didn't notice > that when inspecting the 4.0 artifacts .. a mistake which probably > demonstrates why it would be better if it were under demo/. But it doesn't > mean that until we resolve LUCENE-3998 (if we resolve it), the examples > javadocs should be missing from the build. > I think it should be fixed too. But lets do the work to fix it right, otherwise the bug will resurface again and again. There is no failure in LUCENE-3998: I just did some of the work and stopped when I ran out of time. Lets fix it correctly and avoid hacks. Otherwise its impossible to know really that the release artifacts for facets are correct.
