On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V.
neal.granr...@thermofisher.com wrote:
Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
current
work-in-progress
I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an initial
problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in the VS2010
folder.
This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was
created with a newer version.
Opening the solution file
.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens currens.ch...@gmail.com
wrote:
See inline comments.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V.
neal.granr...@thermofisher.com wrote:
I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
initial
The case of the first character of the stored term Forum and the search term
forum differ.
- Neal G.
-Original Message-
From: hotmail_288fbf38c031d...@live.com
[mailto:hotmail_288fbf38c031d...@live.com] On Behalf Of Gian Maria Ricci
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 10:11 AM
To:
Why not?
I am not confident that the project has reached a level of systematic,
repeatable, releases.
Is that not one of the graduation criteria? Version 2.9.4 (and 2.9.4g)
represent just a single release and the process of porting the code and making
the release products still seems a bit
If your query is always a simple, logical OR of a series of words, then the
fastest way to gather the information you mention would be to run individual
term queries for each search word. This way your code will know which
documents contain each term and your code can then assemble the
Yes, this was discussed before.
No official discussions or decisions about the project should occur outside the
regular newsgroup.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Troy Howard [mailto:thowar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 1:15 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Don't forget to tag the release in SubVersion.
The latest tag is RC3, and I assume that the trunk is the in-progress work on
version 3.0.3.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 2:26 AM
To:
DIGY,
Thanks for the tip, but could you be a little more specific?
Where and how are extension-methods calls replaced?
For example, how would I change the CloseableThreadLocalExtensions method
public static void SetT(this ThreadLocalT t, T val)
{
t.Value = val;
2011 7:42 AM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your Thoughts
Sorry, but I feel the same as Neal.
DIGY
-Original Message-
From: Granroth, Neal V. [mailto:neal.granr...@thermofisher.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 6:08 PM
No interest in Nuget whatsoever.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Michael Herndon [mailto:mhern...@wickedsoftware.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:57 PM
To: lucene-net-...@lucene.apache.org; lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your
really like to know why I
shouldn't trust anything but a line-by-line port. Can you explain a
bit?
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Granroth, Neal V.
neal.granr...@thermofisher.com wrote:
This is has been discussed many times.
Lucene.NET is not valid, the code cannot be trusted, if it is not a
line
This is has been discussed many times.
Lucene.NET is not valid, the code cannot be trusted, if it is not a
line-by-line port. It ceases to be Lucene.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Scott Lombard [mailto:lombardena...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 1:58 PM
To:
would prefer a parallel code that makes the life
easier for manual ports of new releases(until this process is automated)
PS: I presume no one thinks of functional or index-level incompatibility.
DIGY
-Original Message-
From: Granroth, Neal V. [mailto:neal.granr...@thermofisher.com]
Sent
really like to know why I
shouldn't trust anything but a line-by-line port. Can you explain a
bit?
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Granroth, Neal V.
neal.granr...@thermofisher.com wrote:
This is has been discussed many times.
Lucene.NET is not valid, the code cannot be trusted, if it is not a
line
would prefer a parallel code that makes the life
easier for manual ports of new releases(until this process is automated)
PS: I presume no one thinks of functional or index-level incompatibility.
DIGY
-Original Message-
From: Granroth, Neal V. [mailto:neal.granr...@thermofisher.com]
Sent
That only works if you are *allowed* to deploy a new or updated .NET framework
on the target system, which is not always true.
But the problem is not really about deployment it is really more for those of
us who must compile from source and who are not permitted to upgrade our
development
No, the URL in DIGY's email apepars correct and the SVN revision appears to be
1086410.
Question: Should there be a tag for Lucene.Net_2_9_4 as there are for previous
release candidates?
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Wyatt Barnett [mailto:wyatt.barn...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday,
be tagged as
such.
Wyatt: Thanks for helping to test! Looking forward to your results.
Thanks,
Troy
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Granroth, Neal V.
neal.granr...@thermofisher.com wrote:
No, the URL in DIGY's email apepars correct and the SVN revision appears to
be 1086410
There are several things to consider.
The first is what DIGY pointed out. The third parameter of the IndexWriter
constructor determines if the code is creating a new index or opening an
existing index for additions. The code must specify false to open an
existing index for additions.
A
Troy,
The source in the SVN tag does not build:
Lucene.Net.Core.sln(1): Solution file error MSB5014: File format version is not
recognized. MSBuild can only read solution files between versions 7.0 and 9.0,
inclusive.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Troy Howard
Use of IKVM was discussed before.
Adding this layer (or any other shim) on top of Lucene.NET is extremely
unpalatable in the environment in which our products are deployed.
For these products, I would have to abandon use of Lucene.NET.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Bodewig
Robert's correct the StandardAnalyzer will split the input text at the
characters so your index will not contain them. As in this simple example:
StandardAnalyzer aa = new StandardAnalyzer();
System.IO.StringReader srs = new System.IO.StringReader(aaa bbb testtest ccc
ddd);
I'd recommend using the description from the web-site.
---
Lucene.Net is a source code, class-per-class, API-per-API and algorithmatic
port of the Java Lucene search engine to the C# and .NET platform utilizing
Microsoft .NET Framework.
Lucene.Net sticks to the APIs and
Unfortunately no, version 2.9.2 never completed the official release process.
Version 2.0.0.4 is last version for which an official binary release is
available.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Robert Jordan (JIRA) [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 7:12 AM
Agreed, building Lucene.NET from the source in SVN is simple.
However my understanding is that being able to compile a tagged version of the
source does not meet the ASF criteria for a release.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Hans (JIRA) [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday,
As I understand it, only the official Lucene.NET committers (DIGY, George
Aroush, and Doug Sale) can commit alterations to the web site or the source.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Prescott Nasser (JIRA) [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 12:04 PM
To:
Why not digestible? This type of question with clear short source code is most
likely to be answered.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] [mailto:casper...@caspershouse.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 1:33 PM
To: lucene-net-...@lucene.apache.org
Is Java Lucene grown up ? Look at how much discussion it took to determine
how to get Java out of the name :)
The discussion about advancing the algorithm in C#/.NET seems to be missing the
point. If you're developing at the concept level the specific language you use
becomes unimportant.
We've already been through this process once before. Why repeat?
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 6:38 AM
To: lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org
Cc: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org; Lucene mailing list
Subject:
We should not make the Lucene.NET project dependent on a specific IDE (VS2008,
VS2010, etc.) the source should builable from the tools available in the .NET
2.0 SDK or equivalent Mono tools.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey Cameron (JIRA) [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent:
wrong.
At the time (3 years ago) I offered to spend time trying to make a set of
examples such as how to use iFilters (I think that was the term) but nobody was
interested so my attention moved elsewhere.
-Original Message-
From: Granroth, Neal V. [mailto:neal.granr...@thermofisher.com
32 matches
Mail list logo