Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

Greg already has a PR for it: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/458. On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 5:30 PM Robert Muir wrote: > > Can we also push commit to branch 9x (just don't want it to get forgotten) > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 10:50 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > > > > Thanks Greg, Patrick, Mike

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

Can we also push commit to branch 9x (just don't want it to get forgotten) On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 10:50 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > > Thanks Greg, Patrick, Mike and Robert for the quick turnaround on > getting these changes merged! I'll now resume work on the 9.0 release. > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

Thanks Greg, Patrick, Mike and Robert for the quick turnaround on getting these changes merged! I'll now resume work on the 9.0 release. On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 4:44 PM Greg Miller wrote: > > Heads up that both LUCENE-10122 and LUCENE-10062 have been merged onto > branch_9_0 now. @Adrien Grand I

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

Heads up that both LUCENE-10122 and LUCENE-10062 have been merged onto branch_9_0 now. @Adrien Grand I know you're aware already, but following up here just for completeness. Thanks! -Greg On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 11:17 AM Robert Muir wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 2:02 PM Michael McCandless

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 2:02 PM Michael McCandless wrote: > > > Yeah I love that idea, but that's not what Patrick's PR explored (yet?). > > His explored switching away from custom token positions to NumericDocValues > to store the same data (ordinal -> parent mapping), but it still loaded all

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 1:14 PM Robert Muir wrote: On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 12:57 PM Michael McCandless > wrote: > > > > I think for PR 420 (https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/420) we are > (confusingly!) not really seeing performance benefits -- taxonomy index got > a bit bigger, and loading

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 12:57 PM Michael McCandless wrote: > > I think for PR 420 (https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/420) we are > (confusingly!) not really seeing performance benefits -- taxonomy index got a > bit bigger, and loading the parent arrays no faster? So Patrick closed that >

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

I think for PR 420 (https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/420) we are (confusingly!) not really seeing performance benefits -- taxonomy index got a bit bigger, and loading the parent arrays no faster? So Patrick closed that one. But the other PR (https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/264) looks

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

Thanks Greg! On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 6:09 PM Greg Miller wrote: > +1, yeah let's see if we can get these in. It would be nice to not > carry the back-compat logic into 10. I'll prioritize these > today/tomorrow; I think we should be able to turn them around pretty > quickly. I'll update on this

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

+1, yeah let's see if we can get these in. It would be nice to not carry the back-compat logic into 10. I'll prioritize these today/tomorrow; I think we should be able to turn them around pretty quickly. I'll update on this thread when PRs have been merged. Cheers, -Greg On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

Thanks Dawid. @Greg Miller What do you think about getting these two PRs in for 9.0? On Sun, Nov 14, 2021 at 9:25 AM Dawid Weiss wrote: > I think we should wait for these two changes. > > I also think we should add automatic bundle names to all JARs starting > with 9.0. Even if they're not

Re: Lucene 9.0 release candidate

I think we should wait for these two changes. I also think we should add automatic bundle names to all JARs starting with 9.0. Even if they're not proper modules yet, it'd clarify what the module names would be for all of the 9x line. I think a short name of lucene.* is sufficient (we don't need

Lucene 9.0 release candidate

Hello, I plan to build a RC for Lucene 9.0 in the next few days. We don't have blockers left, but there are two faceting changes that look like we could save some backward compatibility logic in 10.x by folding them into 9.0: - LUCENE-10062 :

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

Thank you Dawid! On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 8:20 AM Dawid Weiss wrote: > > Hi Adrien, > > I think I've completed everything I wanted to do (with respect to the > release). There are some other tasks that I have in the queue but they're > not blockers - feel free to create the release branch. Hope

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

Hi Adrien, I think I've completed everything I wanted to do (with respect to the release). There are some other tasks that I have in the queue but they're not blockers - feel free to create the release branch. Hope there won't be too many problems along the way. Dawid On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

Thank you for going ahead! Also, a major release seems like an ideal time to make changes to our distribution packaging, and it doesn't seem like we will be held up for long by that change. On Fri, Oct 29, 2021, 3:57 PM David Smiley wrote: > I think build & distribution oriented efforts

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

I think build & distribution oriented efforts shouldn't be held up by a feature-freeze. FF is more for getting stability on runtime code. But this is Adrien's call. ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 3:09 PM

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

This sounds good to me Dawid. Please update this thread when you are done and I will proceed with branching. Le ven. 29 oct. 2021 à 20:13, Dawid Weiss a écrit : > > Hi Adrien, > > Can you hold for LUCENE-10200? There is a patch under LUCENE-10192 that > restructures the binary distribution -

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

Hi Adrien, Can you hold for LUCENE-10200? There is a patch under LUCENE-10192 that restructures the binary distribution - nobody spoke anything so I assume everyone liked it?... :) I'll try to polish the remaining little issues over the weekend so it should be good for Tuesday but I'd give it a

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

This looks like a great plan. Thanks for taking this forward :) On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 12:30 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > For visibility, I recently opened a new issue about a case of index > corruption which is > a blocker for 9.0. Nhat is

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

+1 On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 9:30 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > > Hearing no objections, I will be moving forward with the plan I outlined > above. Next Monday is a holiday in France so I'll actually be cutting > branch_8_11, branch_9x and branch_9_0 on Tuesday. > > On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 3:40 PM

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

Hearing no objections, I will be moving forward with the plan I outlined above. Next Monday is a holiday in France so I'll actually be cutting branch_8_11, branch_9x and branch_9_0 on Tuesday. On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 3:40 PM Michael Sokolov wrote: > > Mike, your previous email suggests that you

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

> Mike, your previous email suggests that you would like someone else to step > up. If that's correct I'm happy to be the release manager for both 8.11 and > 9.0. Thanks, that would be very welcome! On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:33 PM Timothy Potter wrote: > > Sounds like a good plan Adrien,

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

Sounds like a good plan Adrien, thanks for nailing down some concrete milestones and dates :-) Cheers, Tim On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 7:04 AM David Smiley wrote: > > +1 Adrien. Thanks for moving things along. > > ~ David Smiley > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

+1 Adrien. Thanks for moving things along. ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 3:30 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > For visibility, I recently opened a new issue about a case of index > corruption

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

For visibility, I recently opened a new issue about a case of index corruption which is a blocker for 9.0. Nhat is looking into it. We've been discussing releasing 9.0 for a long time now and I think that everybody agrees with moving forward,

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

Yes! I'm curious to give it a go, but getting pulled in many different directions. If nobody else steps up, I will be free to shepherd the release along in a couple of weeks, assuming the current firestorm subsides... On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 9:54 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > > +1 > > Blockers seem

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

+1 Blockers seem to be done with. So I guess we just need an RM to get the ball rolling? :) I know that the Release Wizard in new Lucene repo needs some updates https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9809 - I may help some with that... Cross-ref other 9.0 release mail-threads: - "Now

Re: Lucene 9.0 release

+1 to your suggestions I just commented on LUCENE-9959 to suggest reverting since the changes are currently half baked and I don't think that they should block 9.0. There are no other blockers left to my knowledge. On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 6:24

Lucene 9.0 release

It's been two years since our last release, we had lots of +1 when we raised this last December, and IMO we are close to baked at this point. I checked JIRA and found two remaining Blockers 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10016 VectorReader.search needs rethought, o.a.l.search