Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Greg Hellings
There is another port - lucene++ - that I've read is the reason CLucene was abandoned. It targets compatibility with Lucene 3 vs CLucene's targeting of Lucene 2. It's on github, and its last commit was ~9 months ago. At least it's better than 2013! There's also Apache Lucy, which is a "loose C"

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread DM Smith
When I contributed to Lucene (Java version) there were folks there who lurked on the mailing lists that were part of the C port. Anyway, I mention it as searching those lists or signing up and asking questions might give appropriate insight. DM > On Feb 21, 2017, at 12:25 PM, Greg Hellings

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Karl Kleinpaste
On 02/21/2017 03:10 PM, Greg Hellings wrote: > The version currently packaged in Fedora is 1.2.24. Scratch other response -- got confused between mentions of clucene and xapian. Duh. ___ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Karl Kleinpaste
On 02/21/2017 03:10 PM, Greg Hellings wrote: > The version currently packaged in Fedora is 1.2.24. Something is confused. 2.3.3.4 here, along with retro 0.9.21b. $ egrep '^(|mingw.*)clucene' /var/log/rpmpkgs clucene09-core-0.9.21b-16.fc24.i686.rpm clucene09-core-0.9.21b-16.fc24.x86_64.rpm

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Greg Hellings
If memory serves, that was back in pre-1.0 days. The version currently packaged in Fedora is 1.2.24. --Greg On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote: > On 02/21/2017 02:54 PM, Peter von Kaehne wrote: > > Xapian is the new default at svn head > > I

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Karl Kleinpaste
On 02/21/2017 02:54 PM, Peter von Kaehne wrote: > Xapian is the new default at svn head I experimented with Xapian in Xiphos a couple years ago. The indices it creates are of horrifyingly monstrous size. ___ sword-devel mailing list:

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Karl Kleinpaste
On 02/21/2017 12:25 PM, Greg Hellings wrote: > This is going to necessitate dropping the package from the MinGW > builds of Sword that I maintain for Fedora which will make future > releases of Xiphos for Windows incapable of offering Lucene based > searching. I will keep using "outdated" MinGW

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Greg Hellings
Really? I know there had been some conversations around Xapian and a brief start on a proof of concept, but I was unaware that it had made it into HEAD or even into living code at all. --Greg On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Peter von Kaehne wrote: > On Tue, 2017-02-21 at 11:25

Re: [sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Peter von Kaehne
On Tue, 2017-02-21 at 11:25 -0600, Greg Hellings wrote: > > Is there any whiff of hope that we might be willing to move off of > depending on CLucene for advanced search support and onto a project > that has any amount of vitality? > I thought we had? Xapian is the new default at svn head

[sword-devel] Lucene Complaint

2017-02-21 Thread Greg Hellings
I know it's been mentioned and hinted at in the past, but I wanted to - again - lodge a complaint regarding the inertia of CLucene use in the engine. CLucene's last release, and last git commit on SourceForge was in 2013. It has had none of the language-specific updates that Lucene has generated