[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5228?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13762508#comment-13762508
 ] 

Robert Muir commented on SOLR-5228:
-----------------------------------

thats the willy-nilly approach I mentioned: I dont like it.

if we are gonna do that, no point in using xml at all, we get no value from it, 
only horrors.

The problem here is not field/dynamicField elements and "where they can be", 
the problem is the fieldType/types elements: they are useless and bring no 
value. Lets get rid of them.
                
> Don't require <field> or <dynamicField> be inside of <fields> -- or that 
> <fieldType> be inside of <types>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-5228
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5228
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Schema and Analysis
>            Reporter: Hoss Man
>            Assignee: Hoss Man
>
> On the solr-user mailing list, Nutan recently mentioned spending days trying 
> to track down a problem that turned out to be because he had attempted to add 
> a {{<dynamicField .. />}} that was outside of the {{<fields>}} block in his 
> schema.xml -- Solr was just silently ignoring it.
> We have made improvements in other areas of config validation by generating 
> statup errors when tags/attributes are found that are not expected -- but in 
> this case i think we should just stop expecting/requiring that the 
> {{<fields>}} and {{<types>}} tags will be used to group these sorts of 
> things.  I think schema.xml parsing should just start ignoring them and only 
> care about finding the {{<field>}}, {{<dynamicField>}}, and {{<fieldType>}} 
> tags wherever they may be.
> If people want to keep using them, fine.  If people want to mix fieldTypes 
> and fields side by side (perhaps specify a fieldType, then list all the 
> fields using it) fine.  I don't see any value in forcing people to use them, 
> but we definitely shouldn't leave things the way they are with otherwise 
> perfectly valid field/type declarations being silently ignored.
> ---
> I'll take this on unless i see any objections.

--
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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to