On Jun 20, 2006, at 5:09 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
----- Original Message ----
From: DM Smith
On 6/20/06, Otis Gospodnetic wrote: Sorry, for some reason my
Yahoo email doesn't prepend ">" on replies, so I'll use "OG" for my
lines.
In my situation, I am constantly working on improving an open
source application. Our use of Lucene is very trivial (from a
lucene perspective) but critical to the application. If there are
bug fixes, enhancements and performance improvements, I want to use
them to improve my user's experience. So, each time there is a
release of Lucene, I get it, test it and if it in itself offers an
improvement, I release our application just upgrading the lucene jar.
OG: Again, there have been a LOT of JVM and JDK improvements since
1.4, too, but you are still using 1.4.
I am using the Java 5 compiler to build a 1.4 compatible binary. So I
get the compiler improvements for all my users.
OG: But I benchmarked Java 1.4 and 1.5 a few weeks ago. 1.5 is
_substantially_ faster. If you want performance improvements, why
not also upgrade Java then? Ths really bugs me. People want the
latest and greatest Lucene, but are okay with the old Java, yet
they claim they want performance, bug fixes, etc.
It's not up to me. Each user of BibleDesktop has to decide for
themselves. Users of MacOS 10.3 and earlier are stuck using Java 1.4.
Users that have upgraded to Java 5 get the advantages of that
runtime. As for me I am running Java 5.
One can get the performance gains just by using the Java 5 jre.
OG: Correct. But one can also not get a performance improvement or
a bug fix if it comes as part of an external contribution that
happens to use 1.5 because the contributor uses 1.5 in his/her work
and doesn't have time to "downgrade" the code, just so it can be
accepted in Lucene.
That's the core argument that you are making and it is a good one. If
it could be designated in Jira whether the attachment were Java 5
then others (perhaps myself) could take the patch, downgrade it and
attach it to the same issue. It sure would beat forking the project.
How many external contributions are to the "core" Lucene?
If the "core" Lucene contribution can be applied and then
"downgraded" to Java 1.4 easily, what harm is in that?
OG: I don't know the number, but JIRA would be the place to
look. My guess is about a dozen or more people.
Steve Rowe found something that can "downgrade" 1.5 code to 1.4 and
looks promising.
If so then perhaps the committers could run the code through it after
applying the patch. Then the contributers would not be adversely
affected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
