Hi Chetan, thanks for the explanation (which makes sense), I think we should go with your latest proposal then.
Regards, Tommaso 2014-11-06 10:29 GMT+01:00 Chetan Mehrotra <[email protected]>: > Hi Tommaso, > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Tommaso Teofili > <[email protected]> wrote: > > the drawback is that you would have to define a similar structure for > each > > field to be boosted for each node type, the advantage is that it's > > compliant with what we have in 1.0.8. > > I would also prefer that but couple of things need to be supported > > 1. The JR2 index format supported NodeType inheritance. So index rule > defined at start would supercede defintion defined later. Hence the > need of list based on NodeType > > 2. Support for regular expression in property names - In JR2 property > name regex was scoped by nodeType. Turning it around would make it > tricky > > Chetan Mehrotra >
