chenpu writes: > James Carlson ??????: > > Yong Sun writes: > > > >> I may not get your points, as my understanding, the documents (in SGML > >> format, or html format, or any formats could be handled by Lucene) are > >> parsed and processed in an off-line manner, which would not run on the > >> server. > >> > > > > What processes these files, and what assumptions does it make? > > > There are some scripts to parse the source SGML file and generate index > files. Those SGML are from IPG(doc team) and G11n(localized documents) > directly. Since this case is just for client app, I did not list them in > the one pager.
Is the DTD used there a public interface? > > Is this project related to "Sun i-Runbook" (maybe a replacement)? > > > No. > > Is Lucene delivered in a way that others can use it? Should it be? > > > Lucene will not be use on server side. That means it will not be > delivered to Opensolaris. I'm confused. Do you mean to say that it won't be used on either the client or the server? If so, then why is it part of this case? (Or is it no longer part of this case?) (Maybe the above should say "will be used on the server side" rather than "will not be use on server side" ... but I'm lost.) > > Can users set up their own servers or is that a "Sun only" operation? > > I would expect that to be a hard requirement for many customers, as > > allowing direct Internet access from within a datacenter is still not > > possible in many places. > > > It's a "Sun only" operation for setting up Web Server. You know the > volumes for contents are big, it's impossible to put them into client > app for off-line review. That makes the architecture even less obvious to me. > > How does the user specify where he gets his information (which server > > to use)? > > > The server info will be hard coded into the client app. Oh. > > I still don't quite see how the proposed project is "obvious" enough > > to be a fast-track. Why not run a full case for it? > > > Thanks for the suggestion, James. Can you help to be sponsor for this > case? Or we can get somebody's help on this? Your fast-track sponsor should have helped out with the process, and directed you to a 1-pager. I'm derailing this case because it doesn't appear to be a fast-track in scope, and I'm finding out too much in bits and pieces; a meeting would be more productive. That means it's now a full case and (at least by tradition) I'm the case owner. (If you prefer a different owner, that'd be fine by me; just look at the member list for any ARC and select someone you prefer.) The next step for you is to check the PSARC agenda and decide when you could be ready for a review. When you decide, send email to psarc-agenda at sac.sfbay to schedule the review. Your materials will normally need to be ready one week in advance of that date, but that can be altered if necessary. (It's not clear to me that your current materials are complete; we seem to be lacking scope information.) The current schedule has a lack of meetings until January 14th. The usual rule is to "ARC early," but if there are schedule problems because of this unusual situation, I'm sure we can work around that by scheduling an extra meeting date. Contact the PSARC chair to do that or to work around other scheduling issues (such as time-of-day). -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
