But typically you wouldn't need to reindex, would you? From the 3.0 javadocs for LUCENE_CURRENT:
WARNING: if you use this setting, and then upgrade to a newer release of Lucene, sizable changes may happen. If precise back compatibility is important then you should instead explicitly specify an actual version. I read this as meaning that it is safe to use it unless you want precise back compatibility and are prepared to accept the risk that you may have to reindex. When upgrading my code and indexes to 3.0 I've used LUCENE_CURRENT and haven't reindexed, and haven't noticed any problems. -- Ian. On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Only use LUCENE_CURRENT if you do not care about backwards compatibility at > all: e.g. you are perfectly happy re-indexing all data when you upgrade the > lucene jar file in future. > > its not about relying on quirks in previous versions of lucene, its about > being compatible with changes in future versions, you set it to LUCENE_30 or > whatever so that you can upgrade to 3.1 jar, without reindexing. > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Ian Lea <ian....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Unless you are relying on quirks in particular versions of lucene >> setting it to LUCENE_CURRENT is probably best. >> >> > -- > Robert Muir > rcm...@gmail.com > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
