+1
This is great! Thanks for taking the initiative, Grant.
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:19 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> I'd like to suggest we start thinking about 1.4 being released in early
> January. Here's my reasoning:
>
> 1. I think we all agree that 1.2 -> 1.3 was way too
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-807?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655523#action_12655523
]
Noble Paul commented on SOLR-807:
-
This does not impact the 'javabin' format in any way. Jus
On Dec 10, 2008, at 10:12 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394475/solr2_maho-vote.png
is this one ok?
Seems totally fine by me.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-821?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Noble Paul updated SOLR-821:
Attachment: SOLR-821.patch
untested.
> replication must allow copying conf file in a different name to sl
I don't think STV makes much sense unless we are picking more then
one. The key in STV is that the extra votes for the "winner" get
passed on to the choice. Since there really is not a next choice it
does not help.
Instant Runoff however does make sense. We cycle through the votes
and
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-821?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Noble Paul updated SOLR-821:
Fix Version/s: 1.4
> replication must allow copying conf file in a different name to slave
>
Great!
We should try to have a release ASAP because we already have a
critical mass of features.A release in January should be a good
milestone.
The official release is very important for a lot of users because
their organizations have a such a policy. We can freeze on a list of
bugs and can star
Doesn't limiting to top 4 defeat the purpose of using STV to overcome
splitting-the-vote?
Seems like we should rank the whole list (or all that an individual
finds acceptable)
-Yonik
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 8:51 PM, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This thread is for solr committers to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394376/solr_sp.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394218/solr-solid.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394475/solr2_maho-vote.png
is this one ok?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/123923
but i don't think changing the api Solr compiles against to
commons-logging makes sense -- not since we're already using the
least common denominator API (slf4j)
sounds good. I agree.
We could add a new dependency tomorow that uses log4j, and ship with
log4j-over-slf4j.jar; but would we th
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394070/sslogo-solr-finder2.0.png
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394264/apache_solr_a_red.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394266/apache_solr_b_red.jpg
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12394
This thread is for solr committers to list the top 4 logos preferences
from the community logo contest. As a guide, we should look at:
http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results.html
The winner will be tabulated using "instant runoff voting" -- if this
happens to result in a tie, the w
: There you go. clear as mud!
: As I see it, we either call a new community poll -- nothing in the rules says
: we can't. or vote on:
FWIW: My opinion hasn't really changed since i said...
>> committers should cast their votes as they feel appropriate to best
>> serve the interests of the co
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655442#action_12655442
]
Ryan McKinley commented on SOLR-906:
The other aspect no note is that StreamingHttpSolrSe
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655438#action_12655438
]
Ryan McKinley commented on SOLR-906:
> how much of the 3.5minutes -> 30seconds is due to
: > Ryan: I may not know where you live, and i may not know what you look
: > like, but if you insist on goading me like this i will dedicate myself to
: > answering those questions so i can come to your house and hurt you.
: game on!
In case anyone is concerned for Ryan's safety: i'm only kiddi
I added some more math to the script I used to generate the results
page... and what do you know: no official winner by any of the
methods! (assuming my math is correct)
check:
http://people.apache.org/~ryan/solr-logo-results.html
for a variety of attempts.
The problem with the STV method
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655431#action_12655431
]
Ian Holsman commented on SOLR-906:
--
also..
The way I've always thought commonsHttpServer w
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655427#action_12655427
]
Ian Holsman commented on SOLR-906:
--
how much of the 3.5minutes -> 30seconds is due to the lo
: - might want a way to dynamically add caches.. but for now adding a
: "magic" facetCache that exists even when not on solrconfig.xml is prob
: easiest (the current solr caches do not get instantiated if they are
: not in solrconfig.xml - they are seen as optional).
thinking about it more -- k
I agree if it is close to a release we should try to synchronize.
Since i don't live in an environment where "official release" is
important, it has never felt like a big deal. Also if you are
cracking into the lucene source, it seems like you are beyond that
too...
The lucene version sh
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-899?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655394#action_12655394
]
Todd Feak commented on SOLR-899:
For our use, I will be subclassing the SolrInputDocument cla
One of the things about the 1.3 release that I didn't care for, was the
inclusion of a non-release version of Lucene. It was very difficult to
track down the source code for the "dev" version that was used. Once
Lucene had release its official version, I upgraded to that (which went
well) so that I
On 10-Dec-08, at 12:41 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
Sure thing.
I take it that there are no objections? If so, I'll call a vote by
the end
of the week.
+1
I just wish we had used this method with the community vote.
I guess as a committer I should try and figure out what order the
community
On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Mike Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 8-Dec-08, at 10:47 AM, Mike Klaas wrote:
On 7-Dec-08, at 7:40 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote
(i.e.,
S
sounds good.
is lucene planning a release anytime soon? If so, is it worth
*trying* to coordinate?
On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:49 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
I'd like to suggest we start thinking about 1.4 being released in
early January. Here's my reasoning:
1. I think we all agree that 1.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655363#action_12655363
]
Ryan McKinley commented on SOLR-906:
also, using the recent patch with a Queue size = 20
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ryan McKinley updated SOLR-906:
---
Attachment: SOLR-906-StreamingHttpSolrServer.patch
Here is an updated version that lets you specify how
I'd like to suggest we start thinking about 1.4 being released in
early January. Here's my reasoning:
1. I think we all agree that 1.2 -> 1.3 was way too long
2. Quarterly releases seem to be a pretty nice timeframe for people
such that you aren't constantly upgrading, yet you don't have to
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Mike Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8-Dec-08, at 10:47 AM, Mike Klaas wrote:
>
>> On 7-Dec-08, at 7:40 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> : I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote (i.e.,
>>> STV).
>>>
>>> Ah... yeah, that seems like
On 8-Dec-08, at 10:47 AM, Mike Klaas wrote:
On 7-Dec-08, at 7:40 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: I would personally prefer more of an "elimination"-style vote
(i.e., STV).
Ah... yeah, that seems like it would be a more fair way to deal with
things then my suggestion, and it doesn't violate
fixed in trunk.
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=725397&view=rev
but it will be another day until that gets out to the repository, so
you may have to build your own for now...
since SOLR-900, solr-core does not have a dependency on common, our
problem is that the pom.xml files are not used
But does solr-core have a dependency to solr-common still? Try clearing your
local repository and rebuilding. I get an error...
Path to dependency:
1) com.name.removed:jar:0.0.5-SNAPSHOT
2) org.apache.solr:solr-core:jar:1.4-SNAPSHOT
3) org.apache.solr:solr-common:jar:1.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655302#action_12655302
]
Ryan McKinley commented on SOLR-906:
The error handling behavior is less then ideal
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ryan McKinley updated SOLR-906:
---
Attachment: StreamingHttpSolrServer.java
This implementation buffers documents in a BlockingQueue
when
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655298#action_12655298
]
Ryan McKinley commented on SOLR-906:
One basic problem with calling add( SolrInputDocumen
Buffered / Streaming SolrServer implementaion
-
Key: SOLR-906
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-906
Project: Solr
Issue Type: New Feature
Components: clients - java
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-904?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ryan McKinley resolved SOLR-904.
Resolution: Fixed
> explose the pending List and the List of ids to
> delete in the solrj UpdateRequ
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655285#action_12655285
]
Doug Steigerwald commented on SOLR-236:
---
Looks fine from my little bit of testing.
> F
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655269#action_12655269
]
ivan.prado edited comment on SOLR-236 at 12/10/08 8:35 AM:
--
I ha
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655269#action_12655269
]
ivan.prado edited comment on SOLR-236 at 12/10/08 8:34 AM:
--
I ha
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Iván de Prado updated SOLR-236:
---
Attachment: collapsing-patch-to-1.3.0-ivan_2.patch
A new patch with problems solved in my first submitt
done.
On Dec 9, 2008, at 11:08 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
Since SOLR-900, 'common' is bundled with 'solrj', we should remove
the stale snapshot from the apache snapshot repos.
Grant, it looks like you need to remove the file:
/x1/www/people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/
s
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-807?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Shalin Shekhar Mangar updated SOLR-807:
---
Attachment: SOLR-807.patch
Updated with a test to verify the encoding/decoding of UUID
44 matches
Mail list logo
