Hmm, I ran into this last week and I specifically recall fixing it, but sure enough, it is fails to build in both branches. I guess I only fixed it in my private branch.
Ah well, it's fixed now. Thanks. Christopher On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <neal.granr...@thermofisher.com> wrote: > Thanks for the updated VS2010 solution files. > Lucene.Net.Core builds without a problem. > Lucene.Net.Demo encounters 12 errors and will not build. > > All 12 are the same error and all are in IndexHtml.cs: > Non-invocable member 'Lucene.Net.Index.TermEnum.Term' cannot be used like a > method. > > An example is this statement, line 139: > reader.DeleteDocuments(uidIter.Term()); > > Term is apparently now a property, no longer a function. > > > - Neal > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx...@hotmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 1:23 PM > To: Lucene Developers; Lucene Users > Subject: RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues > > Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a > quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some people downloading the > pre-release packages (Lucene.Net.Contrib 11 times, Lucene.Net 23 times). > Mostly all quiet regarding issues. Unless there are any issues outstanding, > lets call it good, run RAT on the 3.0.3 branch to fix any issues about > headers, update the changelog files to represent the changes in 3.0.3 from > 2.9.4 ~P >> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400 >> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues >> From: mhern...@wickedsoftware.net >> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> >> oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens. >> >> I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS, >> kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually >> provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good. >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <currens.ch...@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >> > It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces >> > backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog >> > entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with >> > discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease >> > transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't >> > backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both, >> > with a notification that it can't load the project type. >> > >> > Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so >> > you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution >> > compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio." >> > >> > Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS >> > files has been an annoying missing feature. >> > >> > [1] >> > >> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon < >> > mhern...@wickedsoftware.net >> > > wrote: >> > >> > > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not >> > > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should >> > > be able to keep the proj files the same. >> > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com >> > > >wrote: >> > > >> > > > Yes >> > > > >> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone >> > > > ________________________________ >> > > > From: Christopher Currens >> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM >> > > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues >> > > > >> > > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had >> > > forgotten >> > > > about that. >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com >> > > > >wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to >> > date. >> > > > > Anything in trunk should be there >> > > > > >> > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone >> > > > > ________________________________ >> > > > > From: Christopher Currens >> > > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM >> > > > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more >> > > > > issues/concerns. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > Christopher >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. < >> > > > > neal.granr...@thermofisher.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the >> > > > > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the >> > > > > current >> > > > > > work-in-progress. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for >> > > > those >> > > > > > that rely upon the binary packages. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > - Neal >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > > > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:currens.ch...@gmail.com] >> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM >> > > > > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> > > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues >> > > > > > >> > > > > > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and >> > added >> > > > > VS2012 >> > > > > > directory/solution files. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens < >> > > > > > currens.ch...@gmail.com >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > See inline comments. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > > Christopher >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. < >> > > > > > > neal.granr...@thermofisher.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have >> > encountered >> > > an >> > > > > > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file >> > > > > Lucene.Net.Core.sln >> > > > > > in >> > > > > > >> the VS2010 folder. >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, >> > I'm >> > > > not >> > > > > > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is >> > > > very, >> > > > > > very >> > > > > > > out of date. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains >> > > that >> > > > it >> > > > > > >> was created with a newer version. >> > > > > > >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created >> > > > with >> > > > > > >> VS2012 (a not yet released product) >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it >> > > away. >> > > > I >> > > > > > > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to >> > > VS2010 >> > > > > > > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 >> > support >> > > > > back >> > > > > > > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and >> > > > forgot >> > > > > > to >> > > > > > > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution >> > files >> > > > are >> > > > > > (or >> > > > > > > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my >> > > > > laptop, >> > > > > > > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source >> > > > distribution >> > > > > > >> limit themselves to released development tools only. >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary >> > > distributions; >> > > > > > they >> > > > > > >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you >> > need >> > > to >> > > > > > > worry about this. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> - Neal G. >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >
