Re: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

ch...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:16 PM > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust > > We should probably try and have unit tests that will spin up medium trust app > domains and run some basic tests in them, so we

RE: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

ssage- From: Christopher Currens [mailto:currens.ch...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:16 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust We should probably try and have unit tests that will spin up medium trust app domains and run some basi

Re: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

to understand where this issue is coming from as it wasn't in >> 2.9.4 rather than jumping to a quick fix imo. I'll dig a bit myself >> ~P >> >>> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:32:29 +0200 >>> From: si...@devhost.se >>> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apac

Re: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

here this issue is coming from as it wasn't in > 2.9.4 rather than jumping to a quick fix imo. I'll dig a bit myself > ~P > >> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:32:29 +0200 >> From: si...@devhost.se >> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Lucene.Net

RE: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

It'd be nice to understand where this issue is coming from as it wasn't in 2.9.4 rather than jumping to a quick fix imo. I'll dig a bit myself ~P > Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:32:29 +0200 > From: si...@devhost.se > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re:

Re: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

Hi, It got worse. Building a custom AttributeFactory can only handle a few cases, I needed to subclass _every_ TokenStream/TokenFilter to override all attribute-handling methods (AddAttribute, GetAttribute, etc), and all analyzers to use these streams, to use a dictionary with strong referenc

Re: Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

I think it's because we use a WeakReference that inherits from WeakReference, which in turn, requires has this security attribute: "SecurityPermissionAttribute(SecurityAction.InheritanceDemand, Flags = SecurityPermissionFlag.UnmanagedCode)]". I'm going to test on a machine with a medium trust CAS

Lucene.Net 3.0.3 and medium trust

Hi, I'm having trouble upgrading a web application running under medium trust from 2.9.4 to 3.0.3. Code that previously worked now throws a SecurityException. [SecurityException: Request for the permission of type 'System.Security.Permissions.SecurityPermission, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, C

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

l.com] > Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 1:23 PM > To: Lucene Developers; Lucene Users > Subject: RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues > > Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a > quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some p

RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

cene Users Subject: RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some people downloading the pre-release packages (Lucene.Net.Contrib 11 times, Lucene.Net 23 times). Mostly all

RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

ssues outstanding, lets call it good, run RAT on the 3.0.3 branch to fix any issues about headers, update the changelog files to represent the changes in 3.0.3 from 2.9.4 ~P > Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400 > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues > From: mhern...@wickedsoftware.ne

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser > >wrote: > > > > > Yes > > > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > > > > > From: Christopher Currens > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM > > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

> be able to keep the proj files the same. > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser >wrote: > > > Yes > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > > > From: Christopher Currens > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM > > T

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

Windows Phone > > From: Christopher Currens > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had forgotten > about that. &

RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

Yes Sent from my Windows Phone From: Christopher Currens Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had forgotten about that. On Wed,

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

my Windows Phone > > From: Christopher Currens > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more > issues/concerns. > > >

RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date. Anything in trunk should be there Sent from my Windows Phone From: Christopher Currens Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012 directory/solution files. On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens wrote: > See inline comments. > > > Thanks, > Christopher > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. < > neal.granr...@thermofishe

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

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 problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in > the VS2010 f

Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

08.08.2012 23:07, Granroth, Neal V. пишет: 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

RE: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

Yes, we should merge 3.0.3 into the trunk - thanks for the follow up on 3.0.3 Sent from my Windows Phone From: Christopher Currens Sent: 2/12/2012 6:56 PM To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3 I was sick for a while, but I finally

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

//svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/), Does >>> that mean that all of the LUCENE JIRA issues ( >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+LUCENE+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

;> release... ~P >> > From: bode...@apache.org >> > To: lucene-net-...@incubator.apache.org >> > Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:35:25 +0100 >> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3 >> > >> > On 2012-01-25, Michael Herndon wrote: >> > >>

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

ND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide) > are part of this code already? That would make 3.0.3 well on it's way to > release... ~P > > From: bode...@apache.org > > To: lucene-net-...@incubator.apache.org > > Date: Wed, 25 J

RE: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

sion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide) are part of this code already? That would make 3.0.3 well on it's way to release... ~P > From: bode...@apache.org > To: lucene-net-...@incubator.apache.org > Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:35:25 +0100 >

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

On 2012-01-25, Michael Herndon wrote: > Do we have a standard of copy or tag of Java's version source that we're > doing a compare against? I only see the 3_1 and above in the tags. Likely because the svn location has changed in between. I think it must be

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:30:34 -0800 >> From: currens.ch...@gmail.com >> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3 >> >> The source that this port was done from was the java release package. >> If you go to the mirrors: >> http:/

RE: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

but I don't want to overlap too much. I was thinking of fixing the bit shifting crap I ran into last time.. ~P > Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:30:34 -0800 > From: currens.ch...@gmail.com > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3 > > The source

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/branches/Lucene.Net.3.0.3/trunk/src/core/ChangeNotes.txt, but I really need to go through it again and even see if its up to date. 3.0.3's entirety has already been ported to the trunk, except for maybe the 7 files listed here: https://svn.

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

Do we have a standard of copy or tag of Java's version source that we're doing a compare against? I only see the 3_1 and above in the tags. I could attempt to do something similar I did with core and version 4 and use beyond compare between 2.9.4 and 3.0.3 and make a list of files that were touc

[Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

I've updated the confluence page to hopefully give us some direction: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Lucene.Net+3.0.3 I'd think it's just easier if as you take down a Java Lucene Issue, you create a JIRA issue for Lucene.Net and associate it with 3.0.3,

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

On 2011-12-02, Prescott Nasser wrote: > Troy pointed out the benefits of NOT automating a java port, and if we > can get up to parity, keep us in line shouldn't be too difficult. If > we move towards a more .Net version, we are going to lose some of the > ease of that porting. I'm personally ok wi

Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

On 2011-12-01, Christopher Currens wrote: > There are a few patches that were made for 2.9.4 between when the 3.0.3 > branch was forked from trunk and now that haven't been merged in. It looks > like I branched it on Nov. 7th, so > LUCENENET-431, LUCENENET-433, LUCENENET-453, and LUCENENET-455 ma

RE: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

Lucene.Net 3.0.3 I've started a wiki page, very rough, to help track the progress of 3.0.3. It also provides a link to the Issues that Lucene (java) 3.0.3 fixed from their previous release. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENENET/Lucene.Net+3.0.3 Roadmap: I

[Lucene.Net] 3.0.3

With 2.9.4 out the door, do we merge 3.0.3 into the trunk? How do we want to handle this?