Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
I'm not that proficient in JIRA yet, and can only find 22 open issues outstanding. Is this correct, or am I missing something? -r On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.comwrote: You can look at the jira issues for Java lucene 3.0.3 and submit patches for 2.9.4g that will bring it up. Worst case is well keep trying to maintain a line by line and the g. Best case is we can use g as a jump point to make it even more .net like and whatever work you do will help us there as well Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rory Plaire Sent: 12/23/2011 2:27 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress So, if there was a very-occasional contributor who wanted to put some time into the project this weekend, is there a way to do it at this time? I'm only interested in the generics port as well as making sure that the translation offers (at least one-way) compatibility with Lucene indexes. -r On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.com wrote: I don't know if we should do that - the generics is quite different from the line by line port. I would vote we do it personally - I know others are not ok with it. What say other people? Sent from my Windows Phone From: Scott Lombard Sent: 12/23/2011 11:21 AM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress The Anonymous class issue is a readability issue not a functional change. So the release could go forward without it. The work should be continued in the 3.0.3 version. Prescott are you planning on merging the 2.9.4g into the trunk then 3.0.3? Scott -Original Message- From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:37 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress Im not as familiar with the g branch - the notice issue is current, seems like the general incubator has been digging everyone for it lately. Im not sure about the anon or the generics unfortunately Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rory Plaire Sent: 12/22/2011 12:58 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress I was just looking at the issues for 2.9.4g since I have a bit of time to put against them in the coming week. They are here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/ 12316479. Are these current? If so I can just keep going in the direction DIGY set to help close them. -r On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12 AM, michael herndon mhern...@wickedsoftware.net wrote: +1 I believe you tagged the latest during release. Code be reverted +or a new branch to create a patch for 2.9.4 if something major happens since we have scm in place, so I think merging it would not be damaging in any way. for the 2.9.4g branch, I would do a quick scan to see if there are any outstanding tickets or input from DIGY or anyone else who put in major time on that branch. If there are things that are outstanding, throw together a quick list that people can pull from and work through. I can throw up some tweets and point towards this thread if you would like. - Michael On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.com wrote: Its been pretty quiet as of late. I'd like to merge 3.0.3 into the trunk and wipe out the branch. Im going to do this by lazy consensus since responses are a little difficult to come by. Im going to do this Jan 5th - after the holidays to give everyone the opportunity to respond if they think this is a bad idea. I will do it quicker if people respond it is a good idea however. I am also going to package up 2.9.4g the week between the two holidays - if there is anything that needs to get done lets get it taken care of. Finally, if I dont hear any other way in the next day or two I am going to copy the Java lucene jira issues for 3.0.3 release into our jira so that we can track and start knocking them down. Happy holidays all, Prescott Sent from my Windows Phone
RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
That's 40 issues that the Java Lucene team tagged as needed for 3.0.3 release (so they are all closed atm) I will try to port many/most of these over this week into our JIRA so we can track them for ourselves. From: geobmx...@hotmail.com To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 17:21:39 -0800 Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress 40 issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truejqlQuery=project+%3D+LUCENE+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESCmode=hide Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 15:18:22 -0800 From: codekai...@gmail.com To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress I'm not that proficient in JIRA yet, and can only find 22 open issues outstanding. Is this correct, or am I missing something? -r On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: You can look at the jira issues for Java lucene 3.0.3 and submit patchesfor 2.9.4g that will bring it up. Worst case is well keep trying tomaintain a line by line and the g. Best case is we can use g as a jumppoint to make it even more .net like and whatever work you do will help usthere as well Sent from my Windows PhoneFrom: Rory PlaireSent: 12/23/2011 2:27 PMTo: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.orgSubject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress So, if there was a very-occasional contributor who wanted to put some timeinto the project this weekend, is there a way to do it at this time?I'm only interested in the generics port as well as making sure that thetranslation offers (at least one-way) compatibility with Lucene indexes.-r On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:I don't know if we should do that - the generics is quite different from the line by line port. I would vote we do it personally - I know othersare not ok with it. What say other people? Sent from my Windows Phone From: Scott Lombard Sent: 12/23/2011 11:21 AM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forwardprogress The Anonymous class issue is a readability issue not a functional change. So the release could go forward without it. The work should be continued in the 3.0.3 version. Prescott are you planning on merging the 2.9.4g into the trunk then3.0.3? Scott -Original Message- From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:37 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress Im not as familiar with the g branch - the notice issue is current, seems like the general incubator has been digging everyone for it lately. Im not sure about the anon or the generics unfortunately Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rory Plaire Sent: 12/22/2011 12:58 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress I was just looking at the issues for 2.9.4g since I have a bit of time to put against them in the coming week. They are here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/ 12316479. Are these current? If so I can just keep going in the direction DIGY set to help close them. -r On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12 AM, michael herndon mhern...@wickedsoftware.net wrote:+1 I believe you tagged the latest during release. Code be reverted +or a new branch to create a patch for 2.9.4 if something major happens since we have scm in place, so I think merging it would not be damaging in any way. for the 2.9.4g branch, I would do a quick scan to see if there are any outstanding tickets or input from DIGY or anyone else who put in major time on that branch. If there are things that are outstanding, throw together a quick list that people can pull from and work through. I can throw up some tweets and point towards this thread if you would like. - Michael On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Prescott Nasserwrote: Its been pretty quiet as of late. I'd like to merge 3.0.3 into the trunk and wipe out the branch. Im going to do this by lazy consensus since responses are a little
RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
The Anonymous class issue is a readability issue not a functional change. So the release could go forward without it. The work should be continued in the 3.0.3 version. Prescott are you planning on merging the 2.9.4g into the trunk then 3.0.3? Scott -Original Message- From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:37 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress Im not as familiar with the g branch - the notice issue is current, seems like the general incubator has been digging everyone for it lately. Im not sure about the anon or the generics unfortunately Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rory Plaire Sent: 12/22/2011 12:58 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress I was just looking at the issues for 2.9.4g since I have a bit of time to put against them in the coming week. They are here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/ 12316479. Are these current? If so I can just keep going in the direction DIGY set to help close them. -r On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12 AM, michael herndon mhern...@wickedsoftware.net wrote: +1 I believe you tagged the latest during release. Code be reverted +or a new branch to create a patch for 2.9.4 if something major happens since we have scm in place, so I think merging it would not be damaging in any way. for the 2.9.4g branch, I would do a quick scan to see if there are any outstanding tickets or input from DIGY or anyone else who put in major time on that branch. If there are things that are outstanding, throw together a quick list that people can pull from and work through. I can throw up some tweets and point towards this thread if you would like. - Michael On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.com wrote: Its been pretty quiet as of late. I'd like to merge 3.0.3 into the trunk and wipe out the branch. Im going to do this by lazy consensus since responses are a little difficult to come by. Im going to do this Jan 5th - after the holidays to give everyone the opportunity to respond if they think this is a bad idea. I will do it quicker if people respond it is a good idea however. I am also going to package up 2.9.4g the week between the two holidays - if there is anything that needs to get done lets get it taken care of. Finally, if I dont hear any other way in the next day or two I am going to copy the Java lucene jira issues for 3.0.3 release into our jira so that we can track and start knocking them down. Happy holidays all, Prescott Sent from my Windows Phone
RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
I don't know if we should do that - the generics is quite different from the line by line port. I would vote we do it personally - I know others are not ok with it. What say other people? Sent from my Windows Phone From: Scott Lombard Sent: 12/23/2011 11:21 AM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress The Anonymous class issue is a readability issue not a functional change. So the release could go forward without it. The work should be continued in the 3.0.3 version. Prescott are you planning on merging the 2.9.4g into the trunk then 3.0.3? Scott -Original Message- From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:37 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress Im not as familiar with the g branch - the notice issue is current, seems like the general incubator has been digging everyone for it lately. Im not sure about the anon or the generics unfortunately Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rory Plaire Sent: 12/22/2011 12:58 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress I was just looking at the issues for 2.9.4g since I have a bit of time to put against them in the coming week. They are here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/ 12316479. Are these current? If so I can just keep going in the direction DIGY set to help close them. -r On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12 AM, michael herndon mhern...@wickedsoftware.net wrote: +1 I believe you tagged the latest during release. Code be reverted +or a new branch to create a patch for 2.9.4 if something major happens since we have scm in place, so I think merging it would not be damaging in any way. for the 2.9.4g branch, I would do a quick scan to see if there are any outstanding tickets or input from DIGY or anyone else who put in major time on that branch. If there are things that are outstanding, throw together a quick list that people can pull from and work through. I can throw up some tweets and point towards this thread if you would like. - Michael On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.com wrote: Its been pretty quiet as of late. I'd like to merge 3.0.3 into the trunk and wipe out the branch. Im going to do this by lazy consensus since responses are a little difficult to come by. Im going to do this Jan 5th - after the holidays to give everyone the opportunity to respond if they think this is a bad idea. I will do it quicker if people respond it is a good idea however. I am also going to package up 2.9.4g the week between the two holidays - if there is anything that needs to get done lets get it taken care of. Finally, if I dont hear any other way in the next day or two I am going to copy the Java lucene jira issues for 3.0.3 release into our jira so that we can track and start knocking them down. Happy holidays all, Prescott Sent from my Windows Phone
Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
So, if there was a very-occasional contributor who wanted to put some time into the project this weekend, is there a way to do it at this time? I'm only interested in the generics port as well as making sure that the translation offers (at least one-way) compatibility with Lucene indexes. -r On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.comwrote: I don't know if we should do that - the generics is quite different from the line by line port. I would vote we do it personally - I know others are not ok with it. What say other people? Sent from my Windows Phone From: Scott Lombard Sent: 12/23/2011 11:21 AM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress The Anonymous class issue is a readability issue not a functional change. So the release could go forward without it. The work should be continued in the 3.0.3 version. Prescott are you planning on merging the 2.9.4g into the trunk then 3.0.3? Scott -Original Message- From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:37 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress Im not as familiar with the g branch - the notice issue is current, seems like the general incubator has been digging everyone for it lately. Im not sure about the anon or the generics unfortunately Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rory Plaire Sent: 12/22/2011 12:58 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress I was just looking at the issues for 2.9.4g since I have a bit of time to put against them in the coming week. They are here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/ 12316479. Are these current? If so I can just keep going in the direction DIGY set to help close them. -r On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12 AM, michael herndon mhern...@wickedsoftware.net wrote: +1 I believe you tagged the latest during release. Code be reverted +or a new branch to create a patch for 2.9.4 if something major happens since we have scm in place, so I think merging it would not be damaging in any way. for the 2.9.4g branch, I would do a quick scan to see if there are any outstanding tickets or input from DIGY or anyone else who put in major time on that branch. If there are things that are outstanding, throw together a quick list that people can pull from and work through. I can throw up some tweets and point towards this thread if you would like. - Michael On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.com wrote: Its been pretty quiet as of late. I'd like to merge 3.0.3 into the trunk and wipe out the branch. Im going to do this by lazy consensus since responses are a little difficult to come by. Im going to do this Jan 5th - after the holidays to give everyone the opportunity to respond if they think this is a bad idea. I will do it quicker if people respond it is a good idea however. I am also going to package up 2.9.4g the week between the two holidays - if there is anything that needs to get done lets get it taken care of. Finally, if I dont hear any other way in the next day or two I am going to copy the Java lucene jira issues for 3.0.3 release into our jira so that we can track and start knocking them down. Happy holidays all, Prescott Sent from my Windows Phone
Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
I was just looking at the issues for 2.9.4g since I have a bit of time to put against them in the coming week. They are here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/12316479. Are these current? If so I can just keep going in the direction DIGY set to help close them. -r On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12 AM, michael herndon mhern...@wickedsoftware.net wrote: +1 I believe you tagged the latest during release. Code be reverted or a new branch to create a patch for 2.9.4 if something major happens since we have scm in place, so I think merging it would not be damaging in any way. for the 2.9.4g branch, I would do a quick scan to see if there are any outstanding tickets or input from DIGY or anyone else who put in major time on that branch. If there are things that are outstanding, throw together a quick list that people can pull from and work through. I can throw up some tweets and point towards this thread if you would like. - Michael On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.com wrote: Its been pretty quiet as of late. I'd like to merge 3.0.3 into the trunk and wipe out the branch. Im going to do this by lazy consensus since responses are a little difficult to come by. Im going to do this Jan 5th - after the holidays to give everyone the opportunity to respond if they think this is a bad idea. I will do it quicker if people respond it is a good idea however. I am also going to package up 2.9.4g the week between the two holidays - if there is anything that needs to get done lets get it taken care of. Finally, if I dont hear any other way in the next day or two I am going to copy the Java lucene jira issues for 3.0.3 release into our jira so that we can track and start knocking them down. Happy holidays all, Prescott Sent from my Windows Phone
