Yes it does. Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Will Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > Um, doesn't the Apache license require inclusion of the license? Just sayin' > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael McCandless [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2014 8:47 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: How can I make better project than Lucene? > > Well the Apache Software License is very generous about poaching. > > "Your ideas will go further if you don't insist on going with them." > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > > On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Will Martin <[email protected]> wrote: >> Btw: SwSong should not steal code; which implies an existing license whose >> terms he is willing to break. Not a good first step. ;-) >> >> will >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael McCandless [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2014 6:22 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: How can I make better project than Lucene? >> >> Actually I think competing projects is very healthy for open source >> development. >> >> There are many things you could explore to "contrast" with Lucene, e.g. >> write your new search engine in Go not Java: Java has many problems, maybe >> Go fixes them. Go also has a low-latency garbage collector in development >> ... and Java's GC options still can't scale to the heap sizes that are >> practical now. >> >> Lucene has many limitations, so your competing engine could focus on them. >> E.g. the "schemalessness" of Lucene has become a big problem, and near >> impossible to fix at this point, and prevents new important features like >> LUCENE-5879 from being possible, so you could give your engine a "gentle" >> schema from the start. >> >> The Lucene Filter/Query situation is a mess: one should extend the other. >> >> Lucene has weak support for proximity queries (SpanQuery is slow and does >> not get much attention). >> >> Lucene is showing its age, missing some compelling features like a builtin >> transaction log, "core" support for numerics (they are sort of hacked on >> top), optimistic concurrency support (sequence ids, versions, something), >> distributed support (near real time replication, etc.), multi-tenancy, an >> example server implementation, so the search servers on top of Lucene have >> had to fill these gaps. Maybe you could make your engine distributed from >> the start (Go is a great match for that, from what little I know). >> >> All 3 highlighter options have problems. >> >> The analysis chain (attributes) is overly complex. >> >> In your competing engine you can borrow/copy/steal from Lucene's good parts >> to get started... >> >> >> Mike McCandless >> >> http://blog.mikemccandless.com >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 8:43 PM, swsong_dev <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I’m developing search engine, Fastcatsearch. http://github >>> <hthttp://githubtp//github>.com/fastcatsearch/fastcatsearch >>> >>> Lucene is widely known and famous project and I cannot beat Lucene for now. >>> >>> But is there any chance to beat Lucene? >>> >>> Anything like features, performance. >>> >>> Please, let me know what to do to make better product than Lucene. >>> >>> Thank you. >> >
