>From my side I merged everything and I am monitoring Jenkins!
On Mon, 9 Jan 2023, 10:08 Alessandro Benedetti, <a.benede...@sease.io> wrote: > Hi Michael, yes! Doing it right now! > > Cheers > -------------------------- > *Alessandro Benedetti* > Director @ Sease Ltd. > *Apache Lucene/Solr Committer* > *Apache Solr PMC Member* > > e-mail: a.benede...@sease.io > > > *Sease* - Information Retrieval Applied > Consulting | Training | Open Source > > Website: Sease.io <http://sease.io/> > LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/company/sease-ltd> | Twitter > <https://twitter.com/seaseltd> | Youtube > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDx86ZKLYNpI3gzMercM7BQ> | Github > <https://github.com/seaseltd> > > > On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 at 17:18, Michael Gibney <mich...@michaelgibney.net> > wrote: > >> Alessandro, are you still looking to include the SOLR-16588 bugfix? >> Ishan, any updates on the handful of tasks that you had mentioned were >> still outstanding from the 9.1.0 release? Aside from these two open >> questions, it looks like branch_9_1 has settled down with all of the >> changes we had discussed for inclusion in 9.1.1 (unless I'm missing >> something). >> Michael >> >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 4:50 PM Alessandro Benedetti >> <a.benede...@sease.io> wrote: >> > >> > discussing on the PR, once clarified a bit around Lucene94 (and a >> backport >> > to Lucene 9.3 ad hoc for 9.1.1) we should be ready to merge and cherry >> pick! >> > >> > -------------------------- >> > *Alessandro Benedetti* >> > Director @ Sease Ltd. >> > *Apache Lucene/Solr Committer* >> > *Apache Solr PMC Member* >> > >> > e-mail: a.benede...@sease.io >> > >> > >> > *Sease* - Information Retrieval Applied >> > Consulting | Training | Open Source >> > >> > Website: Sease.io <http://sease.io/> >> > LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/company/sease-ltd> | Twitter >> > <https://twitter.com/seaseltd> | Youtube >> > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDx86ZKLYNpI3gzMercM7BQ> | Github >> > <https://github.com/seaseltd> >> > >> > >> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 23:26, Michael Gibney <mich...@michaelgibney.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > This seems fine to me, assuming no objections from others. >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 4:30 PM Alessandro Benedetti >> > > <a.benede...@sease.io> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > What about including this as well in 9.1.1 : >> > > > https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/1255 ? >> > > > It's an annoying neural search bug, and it's pretty much done, just >> > > waiting >> > > > for a few checks and then I'll merge it with the changes! >> > > > -------------------------- >> > > > *Alessandro Benedetti* >> > > > Director @ Sease Ltd. >> > > > *Apache Lucene/Solr Committer* >> > > > *Apache Solr PMC Member* >> > > > >> > > > e-mail: a.benede...@sease.io >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > *Sease* - Information Retrieval Applied >> > > > Consulting | Training | Open Source >> > > > >> > > > Website: Sease.io <http://sease.io/> >> > > > LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/company/sease-ltd> | Twitter >> > > > <https://twitter.com/seaseltd> | Youtube >> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDx86ZKLYNpI3gzMercM7BQ> | Github >> > > > <https://github.com/seaseltd> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 at 17:18, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > On 1/3/23 08:05, Michael Gibney wrote: >> > > > > > and possibly upgrade to Lucene 9.4 >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16442 >> > > > > > particularly considering: >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/11718 >> > > > > >> > > > > It seems like a bad idea to upgrade a critical component to a new >> major >> > > > > or minor version in a bugfix release, unless that upgrade closes a >> > > > > security vulnerability and is fairly limited in scope. I don't >> think >> > > > > either of those applies. >> > > > > >> > > > > Solr 9.1.0 includes Lucene 9.3.0. There are no further 9.3.x >> releases, >> > > > > so we don't have that as an option. >> > > > > >> > > > > > The main concerns for all the above are classloading issues. The >> > > first >> > > > > > one (SlotAcc) I think should be backported, since we know it has >> > > > > > manifested in the wild and it's a very self-contained fix. >> > > > > >> > > > > My bias would be to NOT upgrade Lucene, for reasons described >> above. >> > > > > The change on SOLR-16165 looks OK to me for a point release. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > Shawn >> > > > > >> > > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >> > > >> > > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >> >>
