On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Chris Hostetter<hossman_luc...@fucit.org> 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 > index > : format changing issues - which can be a real pain (having suffered that > first > : hand in the past). The closer we can stay to actual Lucene releases in > : general, the better I think. > > I suggest we not worry about it too much until the situation arrises.
I'm calling attention to it because I don't believe the move to 2.9-dev was ever discussed on solr-dev. AFAIK it was committed as part of SOLR-805... something I missed, and I doubt I'm the only one. The default should be to use released Lucene versions, and we should reluctantly move off of that. > Once upon a time the decision to bump the lucene-java rev in Solr was > drien largely based on wether we people that that version was had useful > additions *and* was relatively "solid". My impression more recently is > that people have been bumping the rev primarily with the > features/improvements in mind, and less consideration of the stability -- > probably due to the (completely valid) assumption that solr trunk doesn't > *need* to be any more stable then the lucene-java trunk, so we might as > well go ahead and rev and help shake things out. 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. -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com
