On Apr 26, 2011, at 8:21 PM, Robert Muir wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Apr 26, 2011, at 7:43 PM, Michael Busch wrote: >> >>> I totally agree with Robert and Simon that it is currently very frustrating >>> that moving code to Lucene is being veto'ed on. >> >> What has been vetoed on? The response veto today? That hardly counts right? >> Just part of today's BS fun. If you guys are letting yonik stop you before >> you even begin - I suppose with a glance - than really, thats your issue IMO. > > did you or did you not receive an email on march 31st (not to any > mailing list, directed only at individuals) containing the terms 'I > don't think there should be more "pull stuff out of solr" '
I do think I should be rich. If it only it was so easy ;) I can find where Simon says everything will be pulled from Solr and I can find where yonik says nothing will be pulled form Solr. This is not a veto - nor are either comments anything I realistically concern myself with in this regard. These are not vetoes. They are the same froth from the same bubbly foam we are witnessing today. I suppose I recommend you don't develop based on these types of broad statements that bubble up after two sides fight. The whole meme of "solr is nothing, its just waiting to be lucene+modules" and "nothing else from solr should be moved to lucene based on the previous" does not affect what I would choose to work on. It's not how this stuff is decided. Good code generally just goes in - whether its a module or a solr join patch - until today. You can physically stop that yes. For a while. - Mark Miller lucidimagination.com Lucene/Solr User Conference May 25-26, San Francisco www.lucenerevolution.org
