Indeed... 2.9.4g it is! "G" for Generics should be easy to remember.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Digy <digyd...@gmail.com> wrote: > It is used already. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE/fixforversion/12315914 > > DIGY > > -----Original Message----- > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thowar...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 12:21 AM > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] VOTE: .NET 2.0 Framework Support After Apache > Lucene.Net 2.9.4 > > That makes sense, however my suggestion of using 2.9.5 is for the same > purpose. Since the code base is now diverging from the Java library, > it makes sense that the version numbers would diverge as well. The > fact that there is no Java version 2.9.5 will make that Lucene.Net > version stand out as having features/code which are different from the > Java library. 2.9.4g sounds like a "bug fix version" for 2.9.4. > > Thanks, > Troy > > > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Digy <digyd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I chose the name "2.9.4g", since 2.9.5 may give a feeling of lucene.java >> 2.9.5 exists. >> 2.9.4g is somewhere between 2.9.4 & 3.0.3(more close to 3.0.3) >> >> DIGY >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thowar...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 11:54 PM >> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] VOTE: .NET 2.0 Framework Support After Apache >> Lucene.Net 2.9.4 >> >> We could specify a new version starting with 2.9.4g and call it 2.9.5 >> ... Let 2.9.4 be 2.0 compatible, and let 2.9.5 not be. >> >> 2.9.5 would include the changes to generic collections, etc.. >> >> Thanks, >> Troy >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Digy <digyd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Before 2.9.4g, I would surely say "drop support for 2.0 completely". But >>> now we have two versions(2.9.4 & 2.9.4g) and one can continue to support 2.0 >>> till its death (2.9.4g may be used as base for future versions, but this is >>> not true for 2.9.4) >>> >>> DIGY >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thowar...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 11:05 PM >>> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org; lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org >>> Subject: [Lucene.Net] VOTE: .NET 2.0 Framework Support After Apache >>> Lucene.Net 2.9.4 >>> >>> All, >>> >>> Please cast your votes regarding the topic of .Net Framework support. >>> >>> The question on the table is: >>> >>> Should Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.4 be the last release which supports the >>> .Net 2.0 Framework? >>> >>> Some options are: >>> >>> [+1] - Yes, move forward to the latest .Net Framework version, and drop >>> support for 2.0 completely. New features and performance are more important >>> than backwards compatibility. >>> [0] - Yes, focus on the latest .Net Framework, but also include patches >>> and/or preprocessor directives and conditional compilation blocks to >>> include >>> support for 2.0 when needed. New features, performance, and backwards >>> compatibility are all equally important and it's worth the additional >>> complexity and coding work to meet all of those goals. >>> [-1] No, .Net Framework 2.0 should remain our target platform. Backwards >>> compatibility is more important than new features and performance. >>> >>> >>> This vote is not limited to the Apache Lucene.Net IPMC. All >>> users/contributors/committers/mailing list lurkers are welcome to cast >>> their >>> votes with an equal weight. This has been cross posted to both the dev and >>> user mailing lists. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Troy >>> >>> >> >> > >
