RE: Incubating Lucene.Net
Hi Erik, I don't have CLA. Is this the one: http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt ? I will read it though and fax it in the next day or so. Regards, -- George -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 2:04 PM To: Lucene Developers List Subject: Re: Incubating Lucene.Net On Feb 23, 2005, at 10:55 AM, George Aroush wrote: Hi folks, 1) Has all the required votes came in? Are we ready for the next step? Is there anything more that I have to do? We're done with the votes and ready to move on. Sorry I let that slip. lucene4c is at least in progress in the incubator now - it now is waiting on some infrastructure work to get the repository and access set up. George - do you have a CLA on file with Apache? If not, that would be a necessary next step to get you as a committer on the incubator repository. 2) One outstanding subject to vote/agree on is the package name. Will it be dotLucene or Lucene.Net? My pick is Lucene.Net Lucene.Net I believe was the consensus. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Incubating Lucene.Net
Yes, that looks like the one to fill out and fax. Otis --- George Aroush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Erik, I don't have CLA. Is this the one: http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt ? I will read it though and fax it in the next day or so. Regards, -- George -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 2:04 PM To: Lucene Developers List Subject: Re: Incubating Lucene.Net On Feb 23, 2005, at 10:55 AM, George Aroush wrote: Hi folks, 1) Has all the required votes came in? Are we ready for the next step? Is there anything more that I have to do? We're done with the votes and ready to move on. Sorry I let that slip. lucene4c is at least in progress in the incubator now - it now is waiting on some infrastructure work to get the repository and access set up. George - do you have a CLA on file with Apache? If not, that would be a necessary next step to get you as a committer on the incubator repository. 2) One outstanding subject to vote/agree on is the package name. Will it be dotLucene or Lucene.Net? My pick is Lucene.Net Lucene.Net I believe was the consensus. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
George Aroush wrote: Proposal for new project Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) George Aroush -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (0) rationale Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) is a source code port of Jakarta Lucene from Java to C#. The port is a one-to-one port of Lucene's high and low level APIs, public and internal APIs, and the underlying algorithms of Lucene as well as the index format. Every Java file released with Jakarta Lucene is ported to Lucene.Net C#. In addition, any index file generated with Lucene.Net is 100% cross compatible with Jakarta Lucene and via versa. Finally, Lucene.Net preserves the look-and-feel of C#'s naming convention for packages, classes, methods and documentation. Lucene.Net 1.4.3 is currently a six-month-old open source project, and is now hosted at SourceForge.net and is backed by its own non-profit organization. Since Lucene.Net is already based on Jakarta Lucene and thus uses the Apache 2.0 license is therefore an appropriate candidate to be moved to the Apache foundation. I anticipate that Lucene.Net will join the recently proposed search.apache.org top-level project, with Lucene and its various ports. Was the current codebase based on the older Lucene.NET project? The one that its authors stopped making available as an open source project? The reason I ask is that I recall that version was under an older version of the Apache License, and I imagine you would require the permission of its authors to relicense it under the newer license. Conceptually I have no objection to bringing in this project, I just want to make sure that the legal bases are covered. -garrett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Incubating Lucene.Net
Hi Garrett, Thanks for your support. No, the port of 1.4.0 and 1.4.3 of dotLucene is from the ground up and has nothing to do with Lucene.Net 1.3. The logs on SourceForge.net shows this. The conflicting question that I have is, Lucene.Net is a better name then dotLucene. On SourceForge.Net we picked dotLucene because LuceneDotNet was taken (the previous developer, back then) So my choice is to call it Lucene.Net instead of dotLucene as it is more appropriate. In addition, the project, including namespace, is referred to as Lucene.Net -- only the distribution package is called dotLucene. Any thoughts on Lucene.Net/dotLucene package name are welcome. Regards, -- George -Original Message- From: Garrett Rooney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 11:22 AM To: Lucene Developers List Subject: Re: Incubating Lucene.Net George Aroush wrote: Proposal for new project Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) George Aroush -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- (0) rationale Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) is a source code port of Jakarta Lucene from Java to C#. The port is a one-to-one port of Lucene's high and low level APIs, public and internal APIs, and the underlying algorithms of Lucene as well as the index format. Every Java file released with Jakarta Lucene is ported to Lucene.Net C#. In addition, any index file generated with Lucene.Net is 100% cross compatible with Jakarta Lucene and via versa. Finally, Lucene.Net preserves the look-and-feel of C#'s naming convention for packages, classes, methods and documentation. Lucene.Net 1.4.3 is currently a six-month-old open source project, and is now hosted at SourceForge.net and is backed by its own non-profit organization. Since Lucene.Net is already based on Jakarta Lucene and thus uses the Apache 2.0 license is therefore an appropriate candidate to be moved to the Apache foundation. I anticipate that Lucene.Net will join the recently proposed search.apache.org top-level project, with Lucene and its various ports. Was the current codebase based on the older Lucene.NET project? The one that its authors stopped making available as an open source project? The reason I ask is that I recall that version was under an older version of the Apache License, and I imagine you would require the permission of its authors to relicense it under the newer license. Conceptually I have no objection to bringing in this project, I just want to make sure that the legal bases are covered. -garrett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[VOTE] Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
Lucene.Net has my +1. Other PMC members please cast your vote also. As for Garrett's concerns, it is my understanding that dotLucene is not based the previous Lucene.NET codebase. Though George mentions Lookout, Beagle, and some other projects - are these projects using the dotLucene codebase? I thought that Lookout used the previous Lucene.NET project. George - could you clarify the lineage of your project and list what projects are using it specifically? Also, perhaps we should stick with calling this dotLucene for now to avoid confusion with the other codebase. Erik On Feb 17, 2005, at 11:14 AM, George Aroush wrote: Proposal for new project Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) George Aroush -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- - (0) rationale Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) is a source code port of Jakarta Lucene from Java to C#. The port is a one-to-one port of Lucene's high and low level APIs, public and internal APIs, and the underlying algorithms of Lucene as well as the index format. Every Java file released with Jakarta Lucene is ported to Lucene.Net C#. In addition, any index file generated with Lucene.Net is 100% cross compatible with Jakarta Lucene and via versa. Finally, Lucene.Net preserves the look-and-feel of C#'s naming convention for packages, classes, methods and documentation. Lucene.Net 1.4.3 is currently a six-month-old open source project, and is now hosted at SourceForge.net and is backed by its own non-profit organization. Since Lucene.Net is already based on Jakarta Lucene and thus uses the Apache 2.0 license is therefore an appropriate candidate to be moved to the Apache foundation. I anticipate that Lucene.Net will join the recently proposed search.apache.org top-level project, with Lucene and its various ports. (0.1) criteria Community: Lucene.Net has an established user community. However, the development community currently consists of primarily George Aroush, the submitter of this proposal. Core Developers: Currently, Lucene.Net has one active committer, George Aroush. Alignment: Lucene.Net currently users Visual Studio.Net 2003. In addition, it is being used by Mono. (0.2) warning signs Orphaned products: Lucene.Net is not an orphan. Inexperience with open source: Lucene.Net's committers are experienced with open source. Homogenous developers: Lucene.Net's committers do not all share an employer or nation. All decisions are made openly on public mailing lists. Reliance on salaried developers: Lucene.Net has no salaried developers. No ties to other Apache products: Lucene.Net has strong ties to Lucene. A fascination with the Apache brand: Lucene.Net has a strong brand already. It has followers and projects based on it such as Lookout, .Text, Beagle and Ascirum. (1) scope of the subprojects All code is currently licensed under the same license as Jakarta Lucene which is Apache 2.0 license. I have not yet signed the Contributor License Agreements but I look forward to it. (3) identify the ASF resources to be created (3.1) mailing list(s) Same as Jakarta Lucene (3.2) Subversion or CVS repositories TBD (3.3) Jira TBD (4) identify the initial set of committers Same as Jakarta Lucene. (5) identify apache sponsoring individual Erik Hatcher, Doug Cutting, and Otis Gospodnetic. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
+1 Doug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [VOTE] Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
Hi Erik, Regarding Garrett's concern, I responded to him regarding, so therefore isn't any issue. As for Lookout, Beagle, ets, I know for fact that Beagle, Ascirum and .Text are using dotLucene, I don't know about Lookout. Just do a Google them and you will see. As for the name of the project, I prefer Lucene.Net -- everything in the package is Lucene.Net, the project name is called dotLucene; this is inconsistent but I will take a vote on it. Regards, -- George -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 11:40 AM To: Lucene Developers List Subject: [VOTE] Re: Incubating Lucene.Net Lucene.Net has my +1. Other PMC members please cast your vote also. As for Garrett's concerns, it is my understanding that dotLucene is not based the previous Lucene.NET codebase. Though George mentions Lookout, Beagle, and some other projects - are these projects using the dotLucene codebase? I thought that Lookout used the previous Lucene.NET project. George - could you clarify the lineage of your project and list what projects are using it specifically? Also, perhaps we should stick with calling this dotLucene for now to avoid confusion with the other codebase. Erik On Feb 17, 2005, at 11:14 AM, George Aroush wrote: Proposal for new project Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) George Aroush -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- - (0) rationale Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) is a source code port of Jakarta Lucene from Java to C#. The port is a one-to-one port of Lucene's high and low level APIs, public and internal APIs, and the underlying algorithms of Lucene as well as the index format. Every Java file released with Jakarta Lucene is ported to Lucene.Net C#. In addition, any index file generated with Lucene.Net is 100% cross compatible with Jakarta Lucene and via versa. Finally, Lucene.Net preserves the look-and-feel of C#'s naming convention for packages, classes, methods and documentation. Lucene.Net 1.4.3 is currently a six-month-old open source project, and is now hosted at SourceForge.net and is backed by its own non-profit organization. Since Lucene.Net is already based on Jakarta Lucene and thus uses the Apache 2.0 license is therefore an appropriate candidate to be moved to the Apache foundation. I anticipate that Lucene.Net will join the recently proposed search.apache.org top-level project, with Lucene and its various ports. (0.1) criteria Community: Lucene.Net has an established user community. However, the development community currently consists of primarily George Aroush, the submitter of this proposal. Core Developers: Currently, Lucene.Net has one active committer, George Aroush. Alignment: Lucene.Net currently users Visual Studio.Net 2003. In addition, it is being used by Mono. (0.2) warning signs Orphaned products: Lucene.Net is not an orphan. Inexperience with open source: Lucene.Net's committers are experienced with open source. Homogenous developers: Lucene.Net's committers do not all share an employer or nation. All decisions are made openly on public mailing lists. Reliance on salaried developers: Lucene.Net has no salaried developers. No ties to other Apache products: Lucene.Net has strong ties to Lucene. A fascination with the Apache brand: Lucene.Net has a strong brand already. It has followers and projects based on it such as Lookout, .Text, Beagle and Ascirum. (1) scope of the subprojects All code is currently licensed under the same license as Jakarta Lucene which is Apache 2.0 license. I have not yet signed the Contributor License Agreements but I look forward to it. (3) identify the ASF resources to be created (3.1) mailing list(s) Same as Jakarta Lucene (3.2) Subversion or CVS repositories TBD (3.3) Jira TBD (4) identify the initial set of committers Same as Jakarta Lucene. (5) identify apache sponsoring individual Erik Hatcher, Doug Cutting, and Otis Gospodnetic. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
+1 Otis --- Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lucene.Net has my +1. Other PMC members please cast your vote also. As for Garrett's concerns, it is my understanding that dotLucene is not based the previous Lucene.NET codebase. Though George mentions Lookout, Beagle, and some other projects - are these projects using the dotLucene codebase? I thought that Lookout used the previous Lucene.NET project. George - could you clarify the lineage of your project and list what projects are using it specifically? Also, perhaps we should stick with calling this dotLucene for now to avoid confusion with the other codebase. Erik On Feb 17, 2005, at 11:14 AM, George Aroush wrote: Proposal for new project Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) George Aroush -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- - (0) rationale Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) is a source code port of Jakarta Lucene from Java to C#. The port is a one-to-one port of Lucene's high and low level APIs, public and internal APIs, and the underlying algorithms of Lucene as well as the index format. Every Java file released with Jakarta Lucene is ported to Lucene.Net C#. In addition, any index file generated with Lucene.Net is 100% cross compatible with Jakarta Lucene and via versa. Finally, Lucene.Net preserves the look-and-feel of C#'s naming convention for packages, classes, methods and documentation. Lucene.Net 1.4.3 is currently a six-month-old open source project, and is now hosted at SourceForge.net and is backed by its own non-profit organization. Since Lucene.Net is already based on Jakarta Lucene and thus uses the Apache 2.0 license is therefore an appropriate candidate to be moved to the Apache foundation. I anticipate that Lucene.Net will join the recently proposed search.apache.org top-level project, with Lucene and its various ports. (0.1) criteria Community: Lucene.Net has an established user community. However, the development community currently consists of primarily George Aroush, the submitter of this proposal. Core Developers: Currently, Lucene.Net has one active committer, George Aroush. Alignment: Lucene.Net currently users Visual Studio.Net 2003. In addition, it is being used by Mono. (0.2) warning signs Orphaned products: Lucene.Net is not an orphan. Inexperience with open source: Lucene.Net's committers are experienced with open source. Homogenous developers: Lucene.Net's committers do not all share an employer or nation. All decisions are made openly on public mailing lists. Reliance on salaried developers: Lucene.Net has no salaried developers. No ties to other Apache products: Lucene.Net has strong ties to Lucene. A fascination with the Apache brand: Lucene.Net has a strong brand already. It has followers and projects based on it such as Lookout, .Text, Beagle and Ascirum. (1) scope of the subprojects All code is currently licensed under the same license as Jakarta Lucene which is Apache 2.0 license. I have not yet signed the Contributor License Agreements but I look forward to it. (3) identify the ASF resources to be created (3.1) mailing list(s) Same as Jakarta Lucene (3.2) Subversion or CVS repositories TBD (3.3) Jira TBD (4) identify the initial set of committers Same as Jakarta Lucene. (5) identify apache sponsoring individual Erik Hatcher, Doug Cutting, and Otis Gospodnetic. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Incubating Lucene.Net
I prefer dotLucene, because it will be less confusing for people new to the project. In Lucene in Action I had to explicitly mention a dead Lucene.NET project on SourceForge, so readers wouldn't mix it with the other one called. ah, see, I don't know which one was dead and which one was alive. Doesn't matter, they are both dead. Anyhow, dotLucene sounds better to me for this reason. Otis Any thoughts on Lucene.Net/dotLucene package name are welcome. Regards, -- George - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
George Aroush wrote: Hi Garrett, Thanks for your support. No, the port of 1.4.0 and 1.4.3 of dotLucene is from the ground up and has nothing to do with Lucene.Net 1.3. The logs on SourceForge.net shows this. Excellent. I'm glad to hear it. The conflicting question that I have is, Lucene.Net is a better name then dotLucene. On SourceForge.Net we picked dotLucene because LuceneDotNet was taken (the previous developer, back then) So my choice is to call it Lucene.Net instead of dotLucene as it is more appropriate. In addition, the project, including namespace, is referred to as Lucene.Net -- only the distribution package is called dotLucene. Any thoughts on Lucene.Net/dotLucene package name are welcome. I don't have any opinion one way or the other on the name, but I will mention that I've always thought it was kind of odd to use something like 'Lucene.Net' as the internal namespace, the .Net portion seems rather redundant, given that you're talking about C# code it's rather obvious that it's .Net, why not simply place it in the Lucene namespace and save some typing? -garrett - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
George Aroush wrote: Any thoughts on Lucene.Net/dotLucene package name are welcome. I agree that Lucene.Net is a better name. It's more consistent with Lucene Java and Lucene4c, the names for other ports of Lucene. I think it's okay to reclaim the name of an abandonded project, especially if the abandoned project is better known and is substantially similar. The only problem would be if someone else felt that the name Lucene.Net was their property. But the folks at http://searchblackbox.com/ don't use name Lucene.Net anymore. Also, I owned and used the domain lucene.net to refer to Apache's Lucene before the Sourceforge Lucene.Net project started in 8/03, which arguably gives me rights to the name: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.lucene.net/ Doug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
On Thursday 17 February 2005 17:14, George Aroush wrote: Proposal for new project Lucene.Net (aka dotLucene) +1 -- http://www.danielnaber.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [VOTE] Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
Hi, From: George Aroush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] As for Lookout, Beagle, ets, I know for fact that Beagle, Ascirum and .Text are using dotLucene, I don't know about Lookout. Just do a Google them and you will see. Lookout use Lucene.Net 1.3.3.1. Pasha Bizhan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Incubating Lucene.Net
Hi, From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The only problem would be if someone else felt that the name Lucene.Net was their property. Read the license and look the source code. Lucene.Net copyrighted to Apache Software Foundation. Pasha Bizhan http://lucenedotnet.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Re: Incubating Lucene.Net
+1 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
