Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.3.0 RC2

2019-10-28 Thread Jitendra soni
I'm able to run it locally and did some verification. so it's +1 SUCCESS! [1:17:33.483295] [image: image.png] On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 5:32 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene/Solr 8.3.0 > > The artifacts can be

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.3.0 RC2

2019-10-28 Thread Anshum Gupta
+1 SUCCESS! [1:20:38.505055] On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 12:31 PM Gus Heck wrote: > SUCCESS! [0:54:45.321103] > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:01 PM Kevin Risden wrote: > >> +1 >> SUCCESS! [1:34:11.886834] >> >> Kevin Risden >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:43 AM Ignacio Vera wrote: >> >>> +1 >>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.3.0 RC2

2019-10-28 Thread Gus Heck
SUCCESS! [0:54:45.321103] On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:01 PM Kevin Risden wrote: > +1 > SUCCESS! [1:34:11.886834] > > Kevin Risden > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:43 AM Ignacio Vera wrote: > >> +1 >> >> >> SUCCESS! [1:13:16.262824] >> >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 6:07 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar < >>

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

2019-10-28 Thread Cassandra Targett
Yes, it does need to be updated. I was waiting to do that until I informed the user list about the change to not publish a PDF any longer which I’m ready to send now, so I’ll also fix the redirect link. Cassandra On Oct 28, 2019, 12:23 PM -0500, Gus Heck , wrote: > Ah yes I assumed that the

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

2019-10-28 Thread Gus Heck
Ah yes I assumed that the original link had come from a good source... OTOH https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/field-types-included-with-solr.html still needs to be updated to point to 8_2 I think. On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:01 PM Chris Hostetter wrote: > > : The redirection is wrong, if you

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

2019-10-28 Thread Chris Hostetter
: The redirection is wrong, if you remove "latest" from the urls with 8_1 in The "redirection" rules appear to be working as designed -- but AFAIK they were never designed with any idea of having a "latest/" path. the Latest URL has no is just the page name w/o a version number, not the page

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.3.0 RC2

2019-10-28 Thread Kevin Risden
+1 SUCCESS! [1:34:11.886834] Kevin Risden On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:43 AM Ignacio Vera wrote: > +1 > > > SUCCESS! [1:13:16.262824] > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 6:07 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar < > shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> SUCCESS! [1:26:27.659346] >> >> On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

2019-10-28 Thread Gus Heck
The redirection is wrong, if you remove "latest" from the urls with 8_1 in them it looks like you get the right page. Also, 8_2 is the latest now so these are also out of date I think. On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:24 AM Gézapeti wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I was trying to access >

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

2019-10-28 Thread Gézapeti
Hi everyone, I was trying to access https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/latest/field-types-included-with-solr.html and it got redirected to https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_1/latest/field-types-included-with-solr.html which is a 404. I've tested https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/latest/

BadApple report

2019-10-28 Thread Erick Erickson
It’s been a while. I think this is mostly informational. I was all excited when the reports were getting s much better, but that was an artifact of some test environments not being up and running. When Mark’s test work hits, we’ll probably have to start over. That said, people SHOULD LOOK

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.3.0 RC2

2019-10-28 Thread Ignacio Vera
+1 SUCCESS! [1:13:16.262824] On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 6:07 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar < shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > SUCCESS! [1:26:27.659346] > > On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 12:02 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Please vote for release candidate 2 for