Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.3 RC1

+1 (binding) SUCCESS! [1:18:24.494917] On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 at 18:24, Jan Høydahl wrote: > +1 (binding) > > SUCCESS! [1:18:11.930433] > > Only ran smoke tester. macOS, Temurin 1.8.0_402 > > Jan > > 5. feb. 2024 kl. 23:23 skrev Houston Putman : > > Please vote for release candidate 1 for

Re: Bugfix release Lucene/Solr 8.11.3

Shouldn't we wait for the 9.4.1 to go out first? That's what I was holding out on. On Sat, 13 Jan, 2024, 12:43 am Houston Putman, wrote: > NOTICE: > > I am now preparing for a bugfix release from branch branch_8_11 > > Please observe the normal rules for committing to this branch: > > * Before

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.3 RC1

n JIRA: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12352945 > I just resolved one other that was solved yesterday, but for the remaining > three I cannot see that they are fixed. > Not 100% sure if all three qualify as blockers either, but they all look > security related. > > Jan >

[VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.3 RC1

Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene/Solr 8.11.3 The artifacts can be downloaded from: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-8.11.3-RC1-rev10d925469f3d4e66b6339b9e1c7d4d4afa4cf206 You can run the smoke tester directly with this command: python3 -u

Re: 8.11.3 release

it was a decent start. > > > > Kevin Risden > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 4:27 AM Pierre Salagnac < > pierre.salag...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> I just opened a pull request. > >> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2679 &g

Re: Welcome Guo Feng to the Lucene PMC

Congratulations and welcome, Feng! On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 22:35, Adrien Grand wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Guo Feng has accepted an invitation to join > the Lucene PMC! > > Congratulations Feng, and welcome aboard! > > -- > Adrien >

Re: RAPIDS RAFT

+Solr list, Lucene list, FYI On Wed, 25 Oct, 2023, 9:13 am Ishan Chattopadhyaya, wrote: > > Hi Nathan, > > I am a committer and PMC member of Apache Solr and Apache Lucene. I have > integrated CUDA into Lucene in the past: > https://twitter.com/ichattopadhyaya/status/1065136

Re: 8.11.3 release

ira/browse/SOLR-16843 > > At that time, I wasn't expecting more 8.x releases, so I did not open a PR > for it. > I can work on a fix if we have a few days more before the release. I think > it is worth to have it in solr 8 (that's not a backport) > > Thanks > > > Le ven

Re: 8.11.3 release

at backporting it. Regards, Ishan On Tue, 19 Sept 2023 at 01:15, Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just a reminder to backport any issues one sees fit for a 8.11.3 release. > I'll try to get an RC out by the end of September, so still more than a > week away.

Re: 8.11.3 release

Just a reminder to backport any issues one sees fit for a 8.11.3 release. I'll try to get an RC out by the end of September, so still more than a week away. On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 at 17:09, Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jan, > Yes, still targeting Sept

Re: 8.11.3 release

ed 8.11.3 release ( > https://lists.apache.org/thread/3xjtv1sxqx8f9nvhkc0cb90b2p76nfx2) > > Does the Lucene project have any bugfix candidates for backporting? > > Ishan, are you still targeting September? > > Jan > > > > 1. aug. 2023 kl. 14:57 skrev Ishan Ch

Re: 8.11.3 release

Oh yes, good idea. Forgot about the split! +Lucene Dev On Tue, 1 Aug, 2023, 6:17 pm Uwe Schindler, wrote: > Maybe ask on Lucene list, too, if there are some bug people like to have > fixed in Lucene. > > Uwe > > Am 01.08.2023 um 11:10 schrieb Ishan Chattopadhyaya: > >

Re: JavaDoc generated with -noindex

+1 to include this in release. Thanks for noticing! On Sat, 8 Jul, 2023, 12:33 am Mike Drob, wrote: > Why is our javadoc currently generated with -noindex? I did some digging > and found that we set that back in LUCENE-3977 to save 10MB, and then added > a property to re-enable it in

Re: Welcome Chris Hegarty to the Lucene PMC

Congratulations Chris! On Mon, 19 Jun, 2023, 3:23 pm Adrien Grand, wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Chris Hegarty has accepted an invitation to > join the Lucene PMC! > > Congratulations Chris, and welcome aboard! > > -- > Adrien >

Re: [VOTE] Dimension Limit for KNN Vectors

That sounds promising, Michael. Can you share scripts/steps/code to reproduce this? On Thu, 18 May, 2023, 1:16 pm Michael Wechner, wrote: > I just implemented it and tested it with OpenAI's text-embedding-ada-002, > which is using 1536 dimensions and it works very fine :-) > > Thanks > >

Re: Running 10.0 build with a custom lucene 9.5

You propose to throw an exception containing this, right? > Java does not throw SecurityException if this is the case, it just ignores the jar! Are you serious? On Wed, 17 May, 2023, 8:02 am Gus Heck, wrote: > Blaming? > > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:05 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <

Re: Running 10.0 build with a custom lucene 9.5

> Having that explicitly called out would have been SUPER helpful. Blaming Java in an exception thrown by Lucene is a ridiculous idea. On Wed, 17 May, 2023, 3:33 am Gus Heck, wrote: > Found it. > > It's a solr thing made worse by the interaction of lucene testutils and >

Re: Seeking Tools and Methods to Measure Lucene's Indexing Performance

Check Lucene bench: https://home.apache.org/~mikemccand/lucenebench/ On Sat, 6 May, 2023, 9:30 am donghai tang, wrote: > Hello Lucene Community, > > I am in the process of learning about Lucene's indexing capabilities, and > I'm keen on conducting experiments to evaluate its performance.

Re: New branch and feature freeze for Lucene 9.6.0

Don't remember the specifics, but I ran into GPG issues during Solr 9.1.0 release. The fix for me was https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/1125, but I don't know if this is the same problem or if it is applicable in Lucene's case. On Tue, 2 May 2023 at 18:27, Alan Woodward wrote: > I am fighting

Re: Concurrent HNSW index

+1, please contribute to Lucene. Thanks! On Thu, 27 Apr, 2023, 10:59 pm Jonathan Ellis, wrote: > Hi all, > > I've created an HNSW index implementation that allows for concurrent build > and querying. On my i9-12900 (8 performance cores and 8 efficiency) I get > a bit less than 10x speedup of

Re: Should IndexWriter.flush return seqNo?

I think Apache Solr could explore leveraging the returned sequence number for its transaction logs. On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 18:36, Michael McCandless wrote: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 6:19 AM Uwe Schindler wrote: > > Having the sequence number public in API does not bring any benefit, as >> you

Re: [Proposal] Remove max number of dimensions for KNN vectors

Seems like they were all 768 dimensions. On Fri, 21 Apr, 2023, 11:48 am Michael Wechner, wrote: > Hi Together > > Cohere just published approx. 100Mio embeddings based on Wikipedia content > > https://txt.cohere.com/embedding-archives-wikipedia/ > > resp. > >

Re: [Proposal] Remove max number of dimensions for KNN vectors

Can the limit be raised using Java reflection at run time? Or is there more to it that needs to be changed? On Sun, 9 Apr, 2023, 12:58 am Alessandro Benedetti, wrote: > I am very attentive to listen opinions but I am un-convinced here and I an > not sure that a single person opinion should be

Re: [Proposal] Remove max number of dimensions for KNN vectors

parameter >>> >> >>> >> Having said this, we see various embedding services providing higher >>> dimensions than 1024, like for example OpenAI, Cohere and Aleph Alpha. >>> >> >>> >> And it would be great if we could run benc

Re: Welcome Ben Trent as Lucene committer

Welcome and congratulations, Ben! On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 8:48 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > > I'm pleased to announce that Ben Trent has accepted the PMC's > invitation to become a committer. > > Ben, the tradition is that new committers introduce themselves with a > brief bio. > > Congratulations

Re: Lucene 9.5.0 release

away from BytesRef like Adrien suggested. I would aim for cutting the > branch tomorrow, would that work for you too? > > Cheers > Luca > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 2:23 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Luca, >> Thanks for volu

Re: Lucene 9.5.0 release

Hi Luca, Thanks for volunteering. Approximately, when do you plan to cut the release branch? If there's time, can I include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9302 for 9.5 still? It is not merged yet. Thanks, Ishan On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 5:31 PM Alessandro Benedetti wrote: > Done on

Re: [VOTE] Migration to GitHub issue from Jira (LUCENE-10557)

-1 On Tue, 31 May, 2022, 4:06 am Xi Chen, wrote: > +1 from me (committer, non-PMC) > > Thanks Tomoko for starting the discussion and organizing / leading this > effort! > > Best, > Zach > > On May 30, 2022, at 2:56 PM, Houston Putman wrote: > >  > +1 Approve (PMC) > > Thanks so much for doing

Re: [DISCUSS] A proposal for migration to GitHub issue (LUCENE-10557)

(Repeating in public what I mentioned in private) I'm generally opposed to this idea because GitHub has been known to take political decisions to cut off access to developers just because of their nationality/region etc. As a community, we should stay politically neutral and not rely on GitHub

Re: Welcome Guo Feng as Lucene committer

Welcome and congratulations, Feng! On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 3:40 PM Koji Sekiguchi wrote: > Welcome, Feng! > > Koji > > > On 2022/01/25 18:09, Adrien Grand wrote: > > I'm pleased to announce that Guo Feng has accepted the PMC's > > invitation to become a committer. > > > > Feng, the tradition is

Re: Welcome Haoyu (Patrick) Zhai as Lucene Committer

Welcome Haoyu! On Sun, 19 Dec, 2021, 7:16 pm Michael McCandless, wrote: > Welcome Patrick! > > Mike > > On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 8:44 AM Robert Muir wrote: > >> Congratulations! >> >> On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 4:12 AM Dawid Weiss >> wrote: >> > >> > Hello everyone! >> > >> > Please welcome Haoyu

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.1 RC1

I think we should publish, release and announce asap, not waiting for 72h or the MVN propogation. On Thu, 16 Dec, 2021, 2:40 am Anshum Gupta, wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Smoke tester is happy. > > SUCCESS! [1:03:13.162577] > > Also tested out a sample search/indexing app. > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.1 RC1

Ran the smoke tested, and it passed. SUCCESS! [1:21:47.769507] +1 On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 9:28 AM Mike Drob wrote: > +1 (binding) > > ran smoke tester - unit tests passed the first time but timed out > downloading artifacts from maven. reran a second time, modifying the smoke > test script to

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

12 release by Lucene PMC. > > > > > > > > Whether Solr needs to release an 8.12 from own repos or not can be > > > discussed in dev@solr if/when needed. So far there is only loose > talk, and I > > > think Solr PMC's energy should be devo

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

hould we do of branch_8x? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Release of Solr 8.12 It should require the current lucene-solr 8.x >>>>>> branch to remove the lucene bits and declare a dependency on lucene 8.11 >>

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

than I get a chance to review the situation. Hence, I just copied the branch there for the moment. > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 7:57 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > > > > > I don't think the solr PMC should issue Lucene 8.12 either. > > I never expressed any intenti

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

ses, and hence I'm going to copy this branch_8x over to Solr repo's "lucene-solr/branch_8x" branch. On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 6:14 PM Robert Muir wrote: > I don't think the solr PMC should issue Lucene 8.12 either. > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 7:42 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote:

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

e have is on solid, sustainable footing before we > release a new version promising double the back compat. > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 7:37 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > > > > Solr doesn't have backward compatability tests, only Lucene has. > > > > T

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

rt Muir : >> >> I gave my technical justification: our backwards compatibility testing >> doesnt work this way. 9.0 can't have guaranteed back compat with >> versions coming in the future. This is lunacy. >> >> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 6:30 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya >

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto "To prevent vetoes from being used capriciously, the voter must provide with the veto a *technical justification* showing why the change is bad (opens a security exposure, negatively affects performance, *etc.* ). A veto without a justification

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

y relies on code changes to the 9x line? Tough to say, we have no > designs or descriptions of the upgrade problem at this point. > > As of today, I'd be strongly against a Solr 8.12 release. > > Tim > > On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 8:32 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > >

Re: What should we do of branch_8x?

I think we should keep the door open for a 8.12 release of Solr (based on 8.11 Lucene). This might mean some split in the codebase, and this can either happen in the lucene-solr repo or the solr repo (I'm okay with either). On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 7:59 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > Uwe brought up

Re: Time to write an open-source book?

+1, great idea. On Wed, 17 Nov, 2021, 2:19 pm Michael Wechner, wrote: > I think this would be great and I would be very happy to contribute. > > For example I am currently trying to understand how the autocomplete / > auto suggest functionality of Lucene works and I could contribute my >

Re: Is it Time to Deprecate the Legacy Facets API

h Jason here, fully. On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 8:37 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Should we deprecate classic faceting in 9x now? > > > It's worth investigating deprecating the stats component also. I believe > JSON facets covers that function

Re: Is it Time to Deprecate the Legacy Facets API

Should we deprecate classic faceting in 9x now? > It's worth investigating deprecating the stats component also. I believe JSON facets covers that functionality as well. It will be painful for users though to switch over unfortunately. +1, lets deprecate stats component too. On Thu, Jan 28,

Re: Soften Jira's note when opening new issues?

+1 On Mon, 20 Sep, 2021, 12:33 pm Adrien Grand, wrote: > Hello, > > Jira gives the following note when opening an issue: > > ``` > This project has a user mailing list and an IRC channel for support. > Please ensure that you have discussed your problem using one of those > resources BEFORE

Re: New branch and feature freeze for Lucene/Solr 8.10.0

> > >>> >>> >> : > > >>> can someone also please look into that benchmark jar issue? >>> >> : > > >>> >>> >> : > > >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >> : > > >>> >>> >> : > &g

Re: New branch and feature freeze for Lucene/Solr 8.10.0

All the best, this is the worst step. On Tue, 14 Sep, 2021, 10:47 pm Timothy Potter, wrote: > Building RC1 now ... stay tuned. > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 2:30 PM Timothy Potter > wrote: > > > > Thanks for the update Mike! > > > > I'm backporting SOLR-15620 right now and am cooking up a quick

Re: Welcome Mayya Sharipova to the Lucene PMC

Congratulations and welcome! On Mon, 28 Jun, 2021, 7:55 pm Mike Drob, wrote: > Welcome! > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 7:21 AM Erik Hatcher > wrote: > >> Ditto - congrats and a huge welcome! >> >> Erik >> >> >> > On Jun 28, 2021, at 9:16 AM, Robert Muir wrote: >> > >> > I am pleased to

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.9.0 RC1

Hi Rob, could it be possible that the tests are timing out on your machine due to lack of resources? Can you try running them with just just one JVM at a time? On Sat, 12 Jun, 2021, 8:20 pm Robert Muir, wrote: > I ran smoketester yet one more time and again numerous tests fail: > >[junit4]

Re: Statement from the Solr and Lucene PMC regarding recent Code of Conduct violations

lr and Lucene PMCs [5][6] have privately discussed the matter > and wish to publicly and officially censure the referenced behavior of > Ishan Chattopadhyaya and Noble Paul. Future infractions will have stronger > consequences. Of course we hope it won't come to that, and we hope this >

Re: Doubling down on our mistakes?

Noble and others are sorry for other inadvertently introduced bugs, > which I’m sure brought down many clusters at inconvenient hours... > > > On 18 May 2021, at 13:26, Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14245 > > There was a *production

Doubling down on our mistakes?

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14245 There was a *production outage* at *odd hours* at my (and Noble's) client, due to this above change in Solr 8.5 onwards by *Andrzej Bialecki*. In short, there is some bug in Solr where a replica gets "null" as the node_name (upon invocation of a

Re: Release Lucene/Solr 8.9.0 should we have it soon

CENE-9827> before we release >>> 8.9, a performance regression to stored fields merges. I'll work on this as >>> soon as possible. >>> >>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 10:28 PM Adrien Grand wrote: >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> Ma

Re: Release Lucene/Solr 8.9.0 should we have it soon

+1 On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 7:50 PM Mayya Sharipova wrote: > Hello everyone, > I was wondering if we can have a 8.9.0 release. It has been more than 3 > months since 8.8.0 was released. > 8.9.0 doesn't need to be the last release in the 8.x series. > > Thanks. >

Re: Welcome Zach Chen as Lucene committer

Congrats, Zach! Thanks for your contributions, looking forward to more! On Tue, 20 Apr, 2021, 2:26 pm Alan Woodward, wrote: > Congratulations and welcome! > > > On 19 Apr 2021, at 15:13, Adrien Grand wrote: > > > > I'm pleased to announce that Zach Chen has accepted the PMC's invitation > to

Re: Welcome Peter Gromov as Lucene committer

Congrats and welcome, Peter! On Tue, 6 Apr, 2021, 11:18 pm Robert Muir, wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Peter Gromov has accepted the PMC's > invitation to become a committer. > > Peter, the tradition is that new committers introduce themselves with a > brief bio. > > Congratulations and

Re: Bugfix release Lucene/Solr 8.8.2

Hi Mike, I wish to get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15288 in, but will likely be able to wrap up by 2 April or so (on vacation right now due to the festival of Holi) Regards, Ishan On Sat, 27 Mar, 2021, 7:41 am Mike Drob, wrote: > I am now preparing for a bugfix release from

Re: SOLR-15056 circuit breaker bugfix?

I don't think asking contributors to do more work than required (as per documentation) is a good idea. On Wed, 24 Mar, 2021, 10:13 am Atri Sharma, wrote: > I did share steps for your reference the last time we talked about this: > > >

Re: Repository fork (master) about to happen (Wednesday)

I'd like to commit SOLR-14381 and LUCENE-9302 together before the fork, please. I'll hopefully wrap up by Tuesday. On Mon, 8 Mar, 2021, 9:51 pm Uwe Schindler, wrote: > Hi again, > > we can maybe "improve" the situation a bit: On Github you can (with > Admin/Ownership rights) rename a project.

Re: Solr webpage SEO

We can add robots.txt to stop Google from indexing/showing in results. On Thu, 4 Mar, 2021, 2:34 pm Jan Høydahl, wrote: > Hi, sending to this list since dev@solr list is not yet announced > properly. > > We have a few days of traffic to the new site and can see the most visited > pages at

Re: Who has access to Google Analytics for Lucene site?

I am opposed, in principle, to letting a private company have access to the IP addresses and other personally identifiable information of our users. On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 8:11 PM Robert Muir wrote: > I'm not trying to come across as anti-analytics, i'm not. But I feel a lot > of those

Re: Who has access to Google Analytics for Lucene site?

+1 Rob On Wed, 3 Mar, 2021, 5:55 pm Uwe Schindler, wrote: > Hi, > > > > sorry, I just noticed that the account disappeared from my google > analytics profile. > > > > It was setup by Grant Ingersoll, maybe he can give us access again. If it > is no longer there, we lost the data, but we can

Re: Who has access to Google Analytics for Lucene site?

Lets avoid GA for our website. I don't think it is a good idea to give a private company (Google Inc) data about our website traffic and their IP addresses etc. On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 1:40 PM Jan Høydahl wrote: > Hi, > > Who has access to the Lucene site GA account? If it is dead in the waters,

Re: Proposal for the Lucene Dependency after git repo split

I would prefer Lucene as a git submodule inside Solr. That way, I can work with solr and Lucene together easily. The commit to which Lucene is pegged at could be from a release branch or a tag. On Sat, 27 Feb, 2021, 3:03 am Adrien Grand, wrote: > FYI Elasticsearch has been regularly depending

Re: JIRA issues to close?

What is the difference between resolving an issue vs closing the issue? Do we need that extra step of closing an issue? On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 2:05 AM Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote: > You may enjoy using JiraSearch for this kinds of things, it has a very > nice "Updated Ago >x", and "Last

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.1 RC1

that to > doing an 8.8.2 soon after 8.8.1 comes out. Are there other fixes you're > aware of that are slated for 8.8.2 @Ishan Chattopadhyaya > ? In other words, if the fix for 15138 is all > that will be in 8.8.2, let's just include it in 8.8.1 and hopefully we > won't need an 8.8.2 ;-) &g

Re: Separate git repo(s) for Solr modules

st) -- > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11872 > > > > ~ David Smiley > > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 9:17 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > ichattopadhy...@gmai

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.1 RC1

> The failure seems to be because of a timeout during collection > creation Thanks for digging in. Seems like that is the exact class of fix that we did for SOLR-15138 and are planning for 8.8.2. Shall we backport that fix to the release branch now (for RC2 or 8.8.2)? > My h/w is really fast and

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.1 RC1

voting on this one, but at least > the smoke test is out of the way. I'll try and debug this tomorrow. > > > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 8:40 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I tried light beasting the test on branch_8_8: >>

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.1 RC1

> However, We can investigate and fix this anyway. > > If required, we can do a 8.8.3 > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 3:10 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > > > > Here's my +1 for the RC1. > > > > SUCCESS! [0:42:38.936787] > > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.1 RC1

Here's my +1 for the RC1. SUCCESS! [0:42:38.936787] On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 9:02 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Per Replica States is a new feature introduced in 8.8.0. It will require a > critical bugfix (SOLR-15138) immediately after 8.8.1 (in a 8

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.1 RC1

to investigate and fix this issue now, we can take a look. If you have a failing seed handy, please let me know. On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 8:33 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Surprising. I'll take a look. > > On Tue, 16 Feb, 2021, 7:29 am Anshum

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.1 RC1

Surprising. I'll take a look. On Tue, 16 Feb, 2021, 7:29 am Anshum Gupta, wrote: > I've unsuccessfully tried getting the smoketester to pass and have had 6 > fails so far. > > At this point it seems like SolrCloudReporterTest and > AutoscalingHistoryTest tests are failing pretty consistently

Re: Separate git repo(s) for Solr modules

part of the lucene-solr repo itself. Also, today, contrib modules are shipped with Solr, which we don't want for new things we might want to build. On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 4:25 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > I haven't been able to follow up on creation of t

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Solr 8.8.0 released

Hi all, This release contains a critical bug, that should be fixed in 8.8.1 shortly. Please avoid upgrading to this release for the moment. https://twitter.com/ichattopadhyaya/status/1360163382171586562 Apologies for the inconvenience. Thanks, Ishan On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 6:01 PM Noble Paul

Re: 8.8.1 release soon

I'd like for us to include SOLR-15138 please, but the fix is still under review and development. Please let us know if it should be possible for us to wait until that one is done (hopefully quickly), otherwise we can release it later (if you want to proceed with the release before this is ready).

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.0 RC2

Thanks Noble! On Thu, 28 Jan, 2021, 4:24 pm Noble Paul, wrote: > [+1] 9 (4 binding) > > [0] 0 > > [-1] 0 > > > This vote has PASSED. > > I shall proceed with the rest of the release process > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:24 PM Anshum Gupta > wrote: > > > > Thanks for handing the release,

Re: Separate git repo(s) for Solr modules

I haven't been able to follow up on creation of the extras repo, but more importantly I wanted to respond to Hoss. I'm out on an emergency for a week or so, shall resume then. If there's a decision on this until then, I shall accept it. On Mon, 25 Jan, 2021, 9:04 am Jason Gerlowski, wrote: >

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene » Lucene-Solr-Tests-8.8 - Build # 137 - Unstable!

Fyi @Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ् On Sun, 24 Jan, 2021, 5:58 am Michael McCandless, wrote: > Hmm, is anyone looking into this one / is there an issue open already? A > quick search on http://jirasearch.mikemccandless.com did not seem to find > an existing issue ... > > Mike McCandless > >

Re: 8.8 Release

Please take over, I'll be out for a week now. Thanks On Sat, 23 Jan, 2021, 9:47 am Noble Paul, wrote: > I've pushed the changes. > > @Ishan Chattopadhyaya if you are unavailable just ping me. I'll put up RC2 > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 2:48 PM Noble Paul wrote: >

Re: 8.8 Release

gt;> >>> ~ David Smiley >>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 1:32 PM Timothy Potter >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Fix is in branch_8x and maste

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.0 RC1

and *upload (not told) the artifacts. On Fri, 22 Jan, 2021, 3:57 pm Ishan Chattopadhyaya, < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Christine, > I've already built the artifacts for rc2. But I'm fairly busy at the > moment to smoke test and told the artifact's right now. &g

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.0 RC1

;>>>> admin >>>>> UI confirm that. >>>>> >>>>> I also tried creating a collection using the admin API, which was >>>>> successful, but the graph didn't reflect that either. >>>>> >>>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.0 RC1

creating a collection using the admin API, which was >>>> successful, but the graph didn't reflect that either. >>>> >>>> I've tested this using both Safari and Firefox, and it's clearly not a >>>> browser issue. >>>> >>>>

[VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.8.0 RC1

Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene/Solr 8.8.0 The artifacts can be downloaded from: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-8.8.0-RC1-rev737cb9c49b08f6e3964c1e8a80132da3c764e027 You can run the smoke tester directly with this command: python3 -u

Re: 8.8 Release

nch. > I should have said that it's not a blocker per say so if you've already > built RC1 and want to proceed with it please go ahead and I'll adapt the > change. > > > Le lun. 18 janv. 2021 à 16:30, Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> a écrit : > &g

Re: 8.8 Release

wrote: >>> >>>> Family first. >>>> >>>> We got this covered Ishan >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:43 PM David Smiley >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Wow. Good call on handing off the release duties so

Re: 8.8 Release

, wrote: > I've merged it . > Thanks > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 5:12 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > > > > Sure Noble, if you are confident it doesn't disrupt the stability of the > release, please go ahead. In case there are any problems with > stability/performa

Re: https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/ needs to be updated on each release

@Atri Sharma FYI On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 2:58 PM Colvin Cowie wrote: > I've just noticed https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/ says 8.6 is the > latest release and doesn't mention 8.7 > > *Latest release*: > >- Solr 8.6 > >

Re: 8.8 Release

: > @Ishan Chattopadhyaya > > I wish to port https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14155 to > 8.8, if it is OK > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 9:20 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > > > > Wish you a very happy new year, Namgyu! > > Please proceed, thanks! >

Re: Separate git repo(s) for Solr modules

"git sub-module" pointing to Solr might > be a key mechanism? Could CI automatically keep it up to date? Someone > needs to try before we really know. > > ~ David Smiley > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > > >

Separate git repo(s) for Solr modules

Hi Devs, As we discussed over the last few months, there seems a need to move non-core pieces away from the Solr core module. The contribs are presently a good place, but it makes sense to have a separate git repository hosting such modules. Some candidates that come to mind are the present day

Re: Requesting a new GH repository for CrossDC modules

o. This way it's easier to manage and drop a repository when it's >> not needed. It doesn't cause clutter and lives in isolation. >> > >> > I think we are on the same page in terms of the intention. >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 10:51 AM Is

Re: 8.8 Release

it be okay to cherry-pick the commit for LUCENE-9661 to the 8.8 > branch after merging? > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 1:48 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Please go for it if you think it won't disrupt the stability and can be >> wra

Re: Requesting a new GH repository for CrossDC modules

or multiple >>>>> packages/plugins, that does not apply to the Solr Operator, which isn't >>>>> even in Java. It's too unique. So I agree with Anshum & others about >>>>> creating an Apache repo for the Solr Operator. >>>>> >

Re: 8.8 Release

; Cheers, > Tim > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:54 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think all the issues mentioned above are in the branch, except >> SOLR-15036. Tim, I'll cut a branch once that is in, latest by Wednesday AM >>

Re: New branch and feature freeze for Lucene/Solr 8.8.0

If one thinks that any new feature/change needs to go in, please discuss in the 8.8 release thread. So long as it doesn't disrupt the stability of the release, we can consider it on a case by case basis. On Tue, 12 Jan, 2021, 8:04 am Ishan Chattopadhyaya, < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>

Re: 8.8 Release

rry for the delay ;-) >> >> Cheers, >> Tim >> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:50 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < >> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Tim! >>> >>> On Mon, 11 Jan, 2021, 11:00 pm Timothy Potter, >>>

New branch and feature freeze for Lucene/Solr 8.8.0

Branch branch_8_8 has been cut and versions updated to 8.9 on stable branch. Please observe the normal rules: * No new features may be committed to the branch. * Documentation patches, build patches and serious bug fixes may be committed to the branch. However, you should submit all patches

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >