I don't see how / why you run into
this issue.
I run into this issue when I tried to build test project (src/test).
George Aroush wrote:
The files that you listed in #1, and #2, are depreciated. Here is the
complete list:
\src\Lucene.Net\Index\DirectoryIndexReader.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Index\MultiSegmentReader.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Index\ReadOnlyMultiSegmentReader.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Index\StoredFieldsWriterPerField.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Index\StoredFieldWriterPerThread.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Search\Spans\NearSpans.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Search\Spans\PayloadSpans.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Search\ExtendedFieldCacheImpl.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Search\NonMatchingScorer.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Search\RemoteCachingWrapperFilter.cs
\src\Lucene.Net\Search\RemoteSearchable.cs
I need to remove them from 2.9.0 but for now, I tend to keep them around
till when I get the test code committed. I don't see how / why you run into
this issue. Those files are not part of VS build project, so they should
not have effected you (unless if you have your own build system that pulls
in every file, do you?).
-- George
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 3:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.0 build 001 "Alpha" is now committed
Thanks a lot.
Found so far:
1) search/Spans/PayloadSpans.cs - is not included in the project file
(Lucene.Net). In order to compile one has to change PayloadSpans from
interface to an abstract class (PayloadSpans : Spans, but Spans is
declared as abstract class). Or alternativly Spans has to be an
interface, but it will require many changes in other source code. Is
there particular reasons to have Spans as abstract class rather than
interface (I don't see any implementation code in Spans)?
2) search/RemoteCachingWrapperFilter.cs
search/RemoteSearchable.cs
- are not included in the project Lucene.Net file.
---
Andrei
George Aroush wrote:
Fixed. Renamed "Payload" to "Payloads". Thanks for being the first to
try
this out.
-- George
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 7:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.0 build 001 "Alpha" is now committed
Hi,
Src does not compile out of the box:
folder Payloads - does not exist, what does exists - folder Payload
(without ending s)
Please, rename search/payload -> search/payloads
Andrei
George Aroush wrote:
Hi Folks,
If you are watching lucene-net-commits<AT>incubator.apache.org you will
noticed that I just committed Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.0 build 001 "Alpha".
This is a port of src\Demo\* and src\Lucene.Net\*. I was hoping to also
include src\Test\* but it's not ready yet (I got tied up with family
commitment over this weekend to wrap it up). However, it's very close
and
I
expect to deliver it by next weekend.
Before my delivery of 2.9.0 code base, I tagged 2.4.0, and updated few
files
in it. I also generated MSDN style documentation for it. You can find
it
in tags\Lucene.Net_2_4_0\*
As for 2.9.0, indexing and searching works but not necessarily bug free,
so
feel free to give it a shot and report back with issues and fixes via
JIRA.
As in the past, I flagged port issues with {{Aroush-2.9}} (as well as
Debug.Fail() to catch run-time port issues). The majority of those port
issues are either none-issues, or minor. However, for now, I like to
leave
them in for sanity check until when I get the test code ported.
Also, if you are following Apache Java Lucene, you will notice that there
is
a major issue with 2.9.0
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1974)
This prompted the need to release of 2.9.1 which may happen next week or
so.
This means, once 2.9.1 is release, we have to adopt it too -- the port of
2.9.1 should be minor and I'm thinking to role it up into 2.9.0. E.g.:
switch over to 2.9.1 rather than release Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.0 followed
with Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.1.
Finally, any further communication about port progress, I will confine
them
to lucene-net-dev@ mailing list only and I ask that we all do the same
moving forward. This way, we don't pollute the mailing list (I always
used
both mailing list because we were a small community, but we are past that
now).
That's it for now. So take 2.9.0 for a spin, and report back!
Thanks.
-- George
