Re: Proposal for Lucene

Otis, Thanks for cranking and getting all this stuff rolling. --Peter On 5/4/02 7:09 AM, "Otis Gospodnetic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Woohoo, I can feel the energy all the way here in NYC! :) > > Clemens' contribution is in jakarta-lucene-sandbox now, so go ahead, > look and play. > > >

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Yeah dude, When a process gets moved onto the Andy-CPU it gets some juicebehind it..when it moves back of and some other process swaps onto it then well...;-) -Andy On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 10:09, Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > Woohoo, I can feel the energy all the way here in NYC! :) > > Clemens'

Re: Proposal for Lucene

- Original Message - > From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 10:23 AM > Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene > > > Hi Manfred/Kelvin (whose name I saw

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Woohoo, I can feel the energy all the way here in NYC! :) Clemens' contribution is in jakarta-lucene-sandbox now, so go ahead, look and play. I will send a separate note about this contribution now. Otis --- "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > cool dude lets put it all in the sam

Re: Proposal for Lucene

aturday, May 04, 2002 10:23 AM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene Hi Manfred/Kelvin (whose name I saw on a lot of this), I'm back on the on cycle and I was about to commit this stuff so we could start refactoring, I've got it building and all set up and ready. But I wanted to make sure that

Re: Proposal for Lucene

cool dude lets put it all in the same place and refactor it together. I didn't even repackage this yet I figured we'd put it in, get it building and then pick, choose and enhance. (like i want to rip jdom out and use commons-logging for this bad boy because log4j has bitten me cleanly in the r

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Note that I will also be putting some web crawler code in the sandbox soon. The code is from Clemens, who posted a few messages recently. Good, lets see some refactoring! Otis --- "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Manfred/Kelvin (whose name I saw on a lot of this), > > I'm b

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi Manfred/Kelvin (whose name I saw on a lot of this), I'm back on the on cycle and I was about to commit this stuff so we could start refactoring, I've got it building and all set up and ready. But I wanted to make sure that you're still okay with it. Once I get it in lucene-sandbox we can s

lucene & avalon (was: Proposal for Lucene / new component)

) { realWriter.addDirectory(ramWriter.getDirectory()); ramWriter = new IndexWriter(new RAMDirectory()); count = 0; } } of course value of limit could be configured peter ps: good tutorial: http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/developing/introduction.html) -------

RE: Proposal for Lucene / new component

On Sat, 2002-03-02 at 19:10, Halácsy Péter wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:13 PM > > To: Lucene Developers List > > Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene / new compone

RE: Proposal for Lucene / new component

> -Original Message- > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:13 PM > To: Lucene Developers List > Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component > > > Humm. Well said. I'm not against using Avalon. My a

RE: Proposal for Lucene / crawler

mercator is the http crawler used in altavista search engine 3.0 (it's not a state-of-the-art product) http://research.compaq.com/SRC/mercator/papers/www/paper.html I hope something can be used and something about google (I've already posted it): http://www7.scu.edu.au/programme/fullpapers/1921/

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

Andrew C. Oliver wrote: >>I think of a more generic generation and transformation framework (The cocoon >framework is doing that (in a modified way) >> > > with the generation and transformation of html/xml via sax events.) > Well, I was just reading the XSLT book and racking my brains about ho

Re: Re: Proposal for Lucene

>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:11:07 Manfred =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sch=E4fer?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote. >Hi, > > >> >> Naw, you just have to own the code, I can use a little PERL script to >> put the header (did I say that...duck...I'm so embarrassed). Basically >> I'm just saying "Can you legally dona

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

Hi, > > Humm. Well said. I'm not against using Avalon. My approach to > software is this though: Get a working draft. Refactor it into that > *stand the test of time* for your second or third release. Things > change...iterate. Not against a super configurable masterpiece...but > first I

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi, > > Naw, you just have to own the code, I can use a little PERL script to > put the header (did I say that...duck...I'm so embarrassed). Basically > I'm just saying "Can you legally donate this, copywright wise, etc.? > Are you willing to donate this?" My boss has granted to donate the sou

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

Hi, Kelvin Tan wrote: > > I guess adopting Avalon is more of a way-of-life (or style of coding) than > it is a mere design decision, and I guess it's not something that I'm > totally prepared for yet. Maybe its because I haven't designed sufficiently > large/complex systems to appreciate the ben

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

On Tue, 2002-02-26 at 05:35, Kelvin Tan wrote: > Pls see inline reply. > > - Original Message - > From: "Manfred Schäfer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:23 PM

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

On Tue, 2002-02-26 at 06:23, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi, > > "Andrew C. Oliver" wrote: > > > > > I'm trying to learn enough about avalon to do this. I'm having a hard > > time of it. After I read the conceptual documentation and see a couple > > of code samples I'm like "now what?" I need a

Re: Proposal for Lucene

On Tue, 2002-02-26 at 05:41, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi, > > > > > 2: (I've rewritten some of the code from 1 for that, so this is much cleaner) A > > > customer needs a tool for importing local mini-Websites on the file-system via > > > an applet, send it to the Web-Server and import it as des

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

Pls see inline reply. - Original Message - From: "Manfred Schäfer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:23 PM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component > Hi, > > "An

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

Hi, "Andrew C. Oliver" wrote: > > I'm trying to learn enough about avalon to do this. I'm having a hard > time of it. After I read the conceptual documentation and see a couple > of code samples I'm like "now what?" I need a "hello avalon" tutorial > to help me.. . U/f I can't write one (chic

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi, > > 2: (I've rewritten some of the code from 1 for that, so this is much cleaner) A > > customer needs a tool for importing local mini-Websites on the file-system via > > an applet, send it to the Web-Server and import it as described in point 1. I've > > tried to write it in a way, that it

Re: Proposal for Lucene

- Original Message - From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 12:48 AM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene > Wow this is an awesome starting point! I'm awed! >

Re: Proposal for Lucene

cognize it (though WinZip does), just rename it to search_full.zip. :) Regards, Kelvin - Original Message - From: "Mark Tucker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:49 AM Subject: RE: Pro

RE: Proposal for Lucene

When I try to unzip the file with WinZip, I get the following error: Cannot open file: it does not appear to be a valid archive. Can someone send or post a new zip file? Thanks, Mark Tucker > I've attached the source-only version, but there's a full version (with > libs) at http://ww

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

On Thu, 2002-02-14 at 06:42, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi, > > > > I think it's redundant to hardcode the indexing logic into all crawler component >(ftp, http, jdbc, filesys crawler). It's an interesting question how the components >can communicate? (don't you think using avalon is a good way?

RE: Proposal for Lucene / new component

> -Original Message- > From: Halácsy Péter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 2:48 AM > To: Lucene Developers List > Subject: RE: Proposal for Lucene / new component > > > Hello, > I've read you proposal (and all email related to

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

On Sun, 2002-02-10 at 09:45, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi, > > > > I've read you proposal (and all email related to it). One thing I'd like to advise >is to distinguish the crawler and the loader component. > > The crawler is responsible for gathering documents from several sources. > > The load

RE: Proposal for Lucene / new component

add (delete) documents to the index manually. > > peter > > > -Original Message- > > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 1:35 PM > > To: Lucene Developers List > > Subject: Proposal for Lucene > >

Re: Proposal for Lucene

e really welcome. > > I've attached the source-only version, but there's a full version (with > libs) at http://www.relevanz.com/search_full.zip. > > - Original Message - > From: Andrew C. Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Lucene Developers List <[EMAIL

Re: Proposal for Lucene

On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 05:26, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi, > > i would suggest two sub-projects: > I think "packages" would be more appropriate of a description, I wouldn't call them "subprojects" so to speak. > 1.Crawler - retrieving docs, wherever they are. > > 2. DocumentHandler extract

Re: Proposal for Lucene

On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 16:39, Dmitry Serebrennikov wrote: > I'd like to add my +1 to the proposal and my +1 to keeping the Lucene as > a library that can exist separately from the applications. Perhaps the > applications should be separate targets in the Lucene project (and build > process) or p

RE: Proposal for Lucene

> > Mark Tucker > > > -Original Message- > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:35 AM > To: Lucene Developers List > Subject: Proposal for Lucene > > > Hi All, > > This is just

Re: Proposal for Lucene

done. On Sat, 2002-02-23 at 12:58, Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > Yes, please. > > Otis > > --- "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I'm about to start revising the Lucene proposal with the ideas I got > > back. Is it okay with everyone if I convert this to work in ana

Proposal for Lucene

Hi All, I'm about to start revising the Lucene proposal with the ideas I got back. Is it okay with everyone if I convert this to work in anakia and commit it into the cvs repository so that we all can work on it and patch it etc? I'll shortly work on the implementation plan as well (basic propo

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

Hi, > I think it's redundant to hardcode the indexing logic into all crawler component >(ftp, http, jdbc, filesys crawler). It's an interesting question how the components >can communicate? (don't you think using avalon is a good way?) I've just had a look at avalon, and it looks promising.

Re: Proposal for Lucene / new component

Hi, > I've read you proposal (and all email related to it). One thing I'd like to advise >is to distinguish the crawler and the loader component. > The crawler is responsible for gathering documents from several sources. > The loader (or indexer) is responsible for loading the gathered document

RE: Proposal for Lucene / new component

to the index manually. peter > -Original Message- > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 1:35 PM > To: Lucene Developers List > Subject: Proposal for Lucene > > > Hi All, > > This is just a few thoughts abo

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi All, I just wanted to apologize for not responding to all of your feedback. I have read it. I rushed to get this proposal done before I leave this week, despite unexpectedly working late a few nights at my new job. I'm leaving for Boston tomorrow and will return in a week. I'll go over all

Re: Proposal for Lucene

- Original Message - From: Andrew C. Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Lucene Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 8:57 PM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene [snip] > > > 5. There's a JDBCDatasource for indexing a table from datab

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Original Message - > From: Andrew C. Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Lucene Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 9:18 PM > Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene > > > > Is this open source? APL'd? Where can I look at it? &

Re: Proposal for Lucene

On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 10:20, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi, > > > > Lets grow that (unless you have a concrete design that I > > can look at).. Over time and a few iterations we'll develop it into > > that. We'll need a base to start with of course though. > > as others have suggested: why not

Re: Proposal for Lucene

D]> To: Lucene Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 9:18 PM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene > Is this open source? APL'd? Where can I look at it? > > -Andy > > On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 20:27, Kelvin Tan wrote: > > Great suggestions all arou

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi, > Lets grow that (unless you have a concrete design that I > can look at).. Over time and a few iterations we'll develop it into > that. We'll need a base to start with of course though. as others have suggested: why not using Ant as the Configuration Framwork with Plugins for DocumentHa

Re: Proposal for Lucene

ssage - From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 8:19 AM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene > Is this open source? APL'd? Where can I look at it? > > On Thu, 200

Re: Proposal for Lucene

On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 05:35, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi again, > > > 2. DocumentHandler extract Text, create apropriate fields etc.. > > > The second is a layer on top of lucene. > > I agree with you(me). but that should be more: It should be a like a command line > interface for a programming

Re: Proposal for Lucene

> - Original Message - > From: Mark Tucker > To: Lucene Developers List > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:03 AM > Subject: RE: Proposal for Lucene > > > I like what you included in your proposal and suggest doing all that (over time) >and taking the

Re: Proposal for Lucene

--- Original Message - > From: "Kelvin Tan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 8:27 PM > Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene > > > Great suggestions all around, and I'm pretty

RE: Proposal for Lucene

the great proposal. > > Mark Tucker > > > -Original Message- > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:35 AM > To: Lucene Developers List > Subject: Proposal for Lucene > > > Hi Al

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Is it opensource? APL? On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 13:59, Manfred Schäfer wrote: > Hi, > > sorry for my mail, i hitted unintentionally the enter-Key. Again: > > I've already written a crawler for HTTP and Filesystem (with different include- > and exclude-Options) (based on OROMatcher, thanks god the

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi again, > 2. DocumentHandler extract Text, create apropriate fields etc.. > The second is a layer on top of lucene. I agree with you(me). but that should be more: It should be a like a command line interface for a programming library. In me vision i see a xml-config-file, which tells me what

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi, i would suggest two sub-projects: 1.Crawler - retrieving docs, wherever they are. 2. DocumentHandler extract Text, create apropriate fields etc.. The second is a layer on top of lucene. First is a autonomous package, wich should be nicely integrated with lucene/Document-Handler, but sh

Re: Proposal for Lucene

27;d like it, and what package name you'd like to use. Erik - Original Message - From: "Kelvin Tan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 8:27 PM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene

Re: Proposal for Lucene

ind. I could also use alot of feedback with what's been done too... So what's the plan to move forward? K - Original Message - From: Mark Tucker To: Lucene Developers List Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:03 AM Subject: RE: Proposal for Lucene I like what you include

Re: RE: Proposal for Lucene

ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 4:35 AM >> To: Lucene Developers List >> Subject: Proposal for Lucene >> >> >> Hi All, >> >> This is just a few thoughts about Lucene. Please send me >> your feedbac

Re: Proposal for Lucene

I'd like to add my +1 to the proposal and my +1 to keeping the Lucene as a library that can exist separately from the applications. Perhaps the applications should be separate targets in the Lucene project (and build process) or perhaps they can be separate projects. I think keeping them toget

[acoliver@nc.rr.com: Re: Re: Proposal for Lucene]

Thanks for the time. Andy - Forwarded message from acoliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 06:07:55 -0800 (PST) From: acoliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Proposal for Lucene X-Mailer: E-mailanywhere V2.0 (

Re: RE: Proposal for Lucene

mplete isolation from the >'indexing library level'. They should live in 'symbioses' (as the jedi >would say.) > +1 >Regards, >Philip > >-Original Message- >From: Nelson Minar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 8:52

Re: Re: Proposal for Lucene

>On Thu, 7 Feb 2002 06:52:26 -0800 Nelson Minar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote. >>This is just a few thoughts about Lucene. Please send me your feedback, >>critiques and thought. >>http://www.trilug.org/~acoliver/luceneplan.html > >Interesting and well written! If I read this proposal correctly, what

RE: Proposal for Lucene

great proposal. Mark Tucker -Original Message- From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:35 AM To: Lucene Developers List Subject: Proposal for Lucene Hi All, This is just a few thoughts about Lucene. Please send me your

Re: Proposal for Lucene

If you can share this code you can post the link to it and we could at least add it to the Contributions page, until somebody adds it to Lucene distribution, if that is an option. Otis --- Manfred Schäfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > sorry for my mail, i hitted unintentionally the enter

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi, sorry for my mail, i hitted unintentionally the enter-Key. Again: I've already written a crawler for HTTP and Filesystem (with different include- and exclude-Options) (based on OROMatcher, thanks god there is open source software!). We needed that for importing Web-Sites into our product, a

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hi, i've already written a crawler for HTTP and Filesystem. We needed that vor importing Web-Sites into our product, a content-managment system. I -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

RE: Proposal for Lucene

IL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 4:35 AM > To: Lucene Developers List > Subject: Proposal for Lucene > > > Hi All, > > This is just a few thoughts about Lucene. Please send me > your feedback, > critiques and thought. > > If you folk

Re: Proposal for Lucene

Hello, I like constructive proposals :) I think this is a fine idea and the part about different document handlers has already been mentioned on this list. I think it would be nice to have easy to use specific applications of Lucene, such as a htDig-like crawler/indexer/searcher components, but

RE: Proposal for Lucene

;symbioses' (as the jedi would say.) Regards, Philip -Original Message- From: Nelson Minar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 8:52 AM To: Lucene Developers List Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene >This is just a few thoughts about Lucene. Please

Re: Proposal for Lucene

>This is just a few thoughts about Lucene. Please send me your feedback, >critiques and thought. >http://www.trilug.org/~acoliver/luceneplan.html Interesting and well written! If I read this proposal correctly, what you're saying is "make Lucene more into an application, rather than just an inde

Proposal for Lucene

Hi All, This is just a few thoughts about Lucene. Please send me your feedback, critiques and thought. If you folks would take a look: http://www.trilug.org/~acoliver/luceneplan.html if you'd like to submit patches: http://www.trilug.org/~acoliver/luceneplan.xml Once I've gotten feedback fr