+1
From: Alan Woodward
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 5:56:16 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Geo/spatial organization in Lucene
+1 to move LatLonPoint and friends to core, and nuke the spatial module
On 25 Jun 2018, at 16:32, David Smiley
Ignacio Vera Sequeiros
mailto:iv...@eso.org>> wrote:
The planar implementation is not a full blown topology library like spatial3d
and it only aims to provide some very fast implementation for some common use
cases. Therefore we might argue that such implementation lives on core. In
ad
The planar implementation is not a full blown topology library like spatial3d
and it only aims to provide some very fast implementation for some common use
cases. Therefore we might argue that such implementation lives on core. In
addition, if we are to add a new spatial tree that supports
Sorry about that!
It is fixed now.
I am pushing the commit from a windows machine and ant precommit is broken on
windows. I did something silly when moving the patch to this computer.
I surely need to improve this procedure! :)
From: Dawid Weiss
Thanks everybody for the kind welcome and the PMC for the invitation.
A bit about me: I work as data architect for a scientific organization in the
branch of astronomy. Currently my contributions have been focused on the
spatial features of Lucene, specially for spherical projections.
I
Done.
Cheers,
Ignacio Vera
From: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 11:02 AM
To: Lucene/Solr dev <dev@lucene.apache.org>; Ignacio Vera Sequeiros
<iv...@eso.org>
Subject: Re: Request to change visibility of classes in geo3d
I think that
Hi,
I am creating my own spatial context by wrapping the objects in lucene geo3d
library and implement my own query which mixes the recursive and the serialized
strategy to add precision to searches.
I had the following issue specially with polygons: The factory for creating
polygons is
