Hi George, I got a fresh copy of Lucene.NET in SVN (after you made a change in HitIterator)
1- With LUCENENET-96 patches Lucene.Net.Store.TestLockFactory.TestLockClassProperty issue succeeded. 2- Lucene.Net.Index.TestNorms._TestNorms succeeded. DIGY -----Original Message----- From: George Aroush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 4:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Status of Lucene.Net 2.1 Hi DIGY, Can you please re-validate and make sure your test is in sync with what's in SVN? I did and I still see those two test failing. Do you think your local may have something to do with this inconsistency? Regards, -- George > -----Original Message----- > From: DIGY [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 12:08 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Status of Lucene.Net 2.1 > > Hi George, > > I don't get any failure in NUnit test of > Lucene.Net.Index.TestNorms._TestNorms. > (Reverse case for > Search.TestDisjunctionMaxQuery.TestBooleanOptionalWithTiebreak > er:-) where I get errors) > > DIGY > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: George Aroush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 6:22 AM > To: [email protected]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Status of Lucene.Net 2.1 > > Hi again, > > In regards to the 2 remaining tests that are still failing, those are: > > Lucene.Net.Index.TestNorms._TestNorms() > Lucene.Net.Store.TestLockFactory.TestLockClassProperty() > > -- George > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: George Aroush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2007 11:19 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > [email protected] > > Subject: Status of Lucene.Net 2.1 > > > > Hi folks, > > > > As you may recall, I released the port of Lucene.Net 2.1's > NUnit code > > base on Aug 11. In a little over 2 weeks, thanks to the > huge effort > > of DIGGY and Jeff (sorry guys, I don't have your full name), the > > number of NUnit test failure has been reduced from 230 to > 2! Thanks > > to 35 different patches!! > > > > This is a great achievement and soon we should be able to > label 2.1 as > > "final" and move on to 2.2 and catch up with the Java version of > > Lucene. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- George Aroush > > >
