LUCENE-1954 and 2.9.1
Hi, Probably I'm too late to the party pointing out that LUCENE-1954 is especially suited to be applied to the 2.9.x line. The patch is obsolete for 3.x/TRUNK. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
RE: LUCENE-1954 and 2.9.1
Yes, this was already fixed in trunk (by adding generics, where the return value is generified to Fieldable). For 2.9.1 it is too late, I think? Mike? Mike: Do you have already a release note formulated? The main information should be the bug fixes, but also that only 2.9.1 will be binary compatible to 3.0 (when all deprecation warnings in customer's code removed), because we added new methods, deprecated the old analyzer ctors and also un-deprecated some methods. So users migrating to 3.0 should first use 2.9.1 not 2.9.0 to clean up their code from deprecations. Uwe - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de -Original Message- From: Bernd Fondermann [mailto:bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:05 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: LUCENE-1954 and 2.9.1 Hi, Probably I'm too late to the party pointing out that LUCENE-1954 is especially suited to be applied to the 2.9.x line. The patch is obsolete for 3.x/TRUNK. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: LUCENE-1954 and 2.9.1
Yeah 2.9.1 is already well on its way to releasing; we could back-port this for a possible 2.9.2? I'll include the drop-in-ability in the release note for 2.9.1; don't yet have a draft but I'll make one real soon now! Mike On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote: Yes, this was already fixed in trunk (by adding generics, where the return value is generified to Fieldable). For 2.9.1 it is too late, I think? Mike? Mike: Do you have already a release note formulated? The main information should be the bug fixes, but also that only 2.9.1 will be binary compatible to 3.0 (when all deprecation warnings in customer's code removed), because we added new methods, deprecated the old analyzer ctors and also un-deprecated some methods. So users migrating to 3.0 should first use 2.9.1 not 2.9.0 to clean up their code from deprecations. Uwe - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de -Original Message- From: Bernd Fondermann [mailto:bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:05 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: LUCENE-1954 and 2.9.1 Hi, Probably I'm too late to the party pointing out that LUCENE-1954 is especially suited to be applied to the 2.9.x line. The patch is obsolete for 3.x/TRUNK. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
RE: LUCENE-1954 and 2.9.1
Yeah 2.9.1 is already well on its way to releasing; we could back-port this for a possible 2.9.2? No need to backport, the patch is for 2.9 branch. I'll commit. I'll include the drop-in-ability in the release note for 2.9.1; don't yet have a draft but I'll make one real soon now! Mike On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote: Yes, this was already fixed in trunk (by adding generics, where the return value is generified to Fieldable). For 2.9.1 it is too late, I think? Mike? Mike: Do you have already a release note formulated? The main information should be the bug fixes, but also that only 2.9.1 will be binary compatible to 3.0 (when all deprecation warnings in customer's code removed), because we added new methods, deprecated the old analyzer ctors and also un-deprecated some methods. So users migrating to 3.0 should first use 2.9.1 not 2.9.0 to clean up their code from deprecations. Uwe - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de -Original Message- From: Bernd Fondermann [mailto:bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:05 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: LUCENE-1954 and 2.9.1 Hi, Probably I'm too late to the party pointing out that LUCENE-1954 is especially suited to be applied to the 2.9.x line. The patch is obsolete for 3.x/TRUNK. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
