On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Otis
Gospodnetic wrote:
>> Right - if we're relatively sure that a Lucene release is imminent
>> (and will happen before a Solr release), it's not such a bad idea to
>> upgrade.
>
> Aha, so this makes sense. Stick with the stable version until we see Lucene
> is p
Hello,
- Original Message
> From: Yonik Seeley
> To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 1:41:39 PM
> Subject: Re: lucene releases vs trunk
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Chris
> Hostetterwrote:
> > : This proposal was just
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Chris
Hostetter wrote:
> : This proposal was just for the next (1.5?) release cycle though.
> ...
> : I agree though - there is rapid movement in Lucene these days, and things
> can
> : be pulled back or altered fairly easily during trunk dev. Sometimes even
: This proposal was just for the next (1.5?) release cycle though.
...
: I agree though - there is rapid movement in Lucene these days, and things can
: be pulled back or altered fairly easily during trunk dev. Sometimes even index
: format changing issues - which can be a real pain (havin
onik Seeley
To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 7:18:31 AM
Subject: lucene releases vs trunk
For the next release cycle (presumably 1.5?) I think we should really
try to stick to released versions of Lucene, and not use dev/trunk
versions.
Early in Solr's lifetime, L
-- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message
> From: Yonik Seeley
> To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 7:18:31 AM
> Subject: lucene releases vs trunk
>
> For the next release cycle (presumably 1.5?) I think we should really
> try to stick
This is an excellent idea.
When I find a problem and want to research the Lucene bugs that might
describe it, that is really hard with a trunk build. It's easy with a
release build.
wunder
On 6/25/09 4:18 AM, "Yonik Seeley" wrote:
> For the next release cycle (presumably 1.5?) I think we shoul
For the next release cycle (presumably 1.5?) I think we should really
try to stick to released versions of Lucene, and not use dev/trunk
versions.
Early in Solr's lifetime, Lucene trunk was more stable (APIs changed
little, even on non-released versions), and Lucene releases were few
and far betwee
