I would strongly prefer a released version of Lucene. We made some changes to Solr 1.1 that required tweaks inside of Lucene, and it was quite a treasure hunt to a suitable set of Lucene source.
It just seems wrong for Solr to release a version of Lucene. wunder On 8/6/08 8:53 AM, "Chris Hostetter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > : Yes, it's good that lots of Solr people are also Lucene people. But I > : don't think that makes it alright to ship Lucene nightlies or > : snapshots. > > Apache Lucene is a TLP, Apache Solr and Apache Lucene-Java are just > individual products/sub-projects of that TLP. > > If the Apache Lucene PMC votes to release a particular bundle of source > code as "Apache Solr 1.3" and that bundle includes source (or binary) code > from the Lucene-Java subproject that hasn't already been released (via PMC > vote) then it is by definition officially released Apache Lucene software. > > So in a nutshell: yes it is "alright for Solr to ship Lucene nightlies" -- > because once the PMC votes on that Solr release, it doesn't matter where > that Lucene-Java jar came from, it's officially released code. > > I'm told there is even precedence for the PMC of a TLP X to vote > and officially release code from completley seperate TLP Y because Y had > not had a release and X was ready to go. > > Where dependencies on "snapshots" in official releases causes problems is > when those snapshots are from third parties and/or are not reproducable -- > where the specific version of the dependencies is unknown and as a result > the "dependee" can not be reproduced. We do not have that problem > with any Apache codebase we have a dependency on. We know exactly which > svn revision the dependencies come from, and since the SVN repository is > public, anyone can recreate it. > > > -Hoss >
