Did this ("may even be faster") turn out to be true?
Otis
- Original Message
> From: Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, September 9, 2008 11:07:29 AM
> Subject: Re: replace stax API with Geronimo-stax+Woodsto
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 09:41 -0400, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Arg. I'm torn. We've released it before, which of course doesn't
> make it right. However, if you check out the Stax code, it is all
> there and licensed as ASL. You would think we could take their word
> for it. However, the pr
I've updated trunk and all tests pass. Other people can start testing
via trunk now if they want.
I'm in the process of updating NOTICE.txt
-Yonik
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FYI, I'm testing Solr with woodstox now and will probably do some ad
> hoc
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 8:27 PM, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Careful tracking and handling of IP rights is paramount at Apache.
> Knowingly releasing something with questionable IP, when a drop-in
> replacement exists, is something that could bring the ASF Board
> crashing down on u
Yeah, unfortunately, we can't release with IP issues like this.
However, Woodstox actually looks to be quite nice from a quick
glance. It's ASL. It's actively maintained (Stax is not). The
downside, of course, is we have virtually no running time w/ it.
On Sep 9, 2008, at 10:57 AM, Yoni
We've been using woodstox in production for over a year.
No problems.
wunder
On 9/9/08 8:07 AM, "Yonik Seeley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FYI, I'm testing Solr with woodstox now and will probably do some ad
> hoc stress testing too.
> But woodstox is a quality parser. I expect less problems t
FYI, I'm testing Solr with woodstox now and will probably do some ad
hoc stress testing too.
But woodstox is a quality parser. I expect less problems then we had
with the reference implementation (and it may even be faster too)
-Yonik
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have released with StaX earlier. We have never tested in production
> environments with woodstox. Even though I doubt there will be a problem but
> we can never know unless we use it. Let's not delay 1.3 anymore.
We have released with StaX earlier. We have never tested in production
environments with woodstox. Even though I doubt there will be a problem but
we can never know unless we use it. Let's not delay 1.3 anymore. We can make
this change for 1.4
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAI
Arg. I'm torn. We've released it before, which of course doesn't
make it right. However, if you check out the Stax code, it is all
there and licensed as ASL. You would think we could take their word
for it. However, the problem is that now someone has cast doubt on
whether that code wa
Someone brought up an issue with the StAX licensem, and after digging
through legal-discuss archives it seems the easiest way forward is to
perhaps replace it with the geronimo stax API and the woodstox
implementation.
I brought it up on legal-discuss again, but I'm not hopeful of an
unequivocal a
11 matches
Mail list logo
