I'd almost rather maintain fixes in the JIRA issue. Because its just two
separate classes, I think thats a good enough central place?
I'd not really opposed to putting it in contrib, but the replacement is
not likely to be exactly the same, and I don't know that we should
distribute something we plan on pulling very soon.

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Mark Harwood (JIRA) <j...@apache.org>wrote:

>
>    [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1486?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12737270#action_12737270]
>
> Mark Harwood commented on LUCENE-1486:
> --------------------------------------
>
> No objections to pulling from core given the impending deprecation of the
> QueryParser base class.
>
> I know of at least 2 folks using it so moving it to contrib would help
> provide somewhere to maintain fixes while we wait for the new QueryParser to
> incorporate the complex phrase features.
>
> > Wildcards, ORs etc inside Phrase queries
> > ----------------------------------------
> >
> >                 Key: LUCENE-1486
> >                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1486
> >             Project: Lucene - Java
> >          Issue Type: Improvement
> >          Components: QueryParser
> >    Affects Versions: 2.4
> >            Reporter: Mark Harwood
> >            Assignee: Mark Harwood
> >            Priority: Minor
> >             Fix For: 2.9
> >
> >         Attachments: ComplexPhraseQueryParser.java,
> junit_complex_phrase_qp_07_21_2009.patch,
> junit_complex_phrase_qp_07_22_2009.patch, Lucene-1486 non default
> field.patch, LUCENE-1486.patch, LUCENE-1486.patch, LUCENE-1486.patch,
> LUCENE-1486.patch, TestComplexPhraseQuery.java
> >
> >
> > An extension to the default QueryParser that overrides the parsing of
> PhraseQueries to allow more complex syntax e.g. wildcards in phrase queries.
> > The implementation feels a little hacky - this is arguably better handled
> in QueryParser itself. This works as a proof of concept  for much of the
> query parser syntax. Examples from the Junit test include:
> >               checkMatches("\"j*   smyth~\"", "1,2"); //wildcards and
> fuzzies are OK in phrases
> >               checkMatches("\"(jo* -john)  smith\"", "2"); // boolean
> logic works
> >               checkMatches("\"jo*  smith\"~2", "1,2,3"); // position
> logic works.
> >
> >               checkBadQuery("\"jo*  id:1 smith\""); //mixing fields in a
> phrase is bad
> >               checkBadQuery("\"jo* \"smith\" \""); //phrases inside
> phrases is bad
> >               checkBadQuery("\"jo* [sma TO smZ]\" \""); //range queries
> inside phrases not supported
> > Code plus Junit test to follow...
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>


-- 
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com

Reply via email to