Think we crossed lines somewhere on the first part of the discussion.
>>But your doing that yourself at source forge? Hasn't there been a lot of work on an external LocalLucene, even after it was put into contrib? While the contrib version was left in a fairly hairy state? Thats just the nature of the license - but putting LocalLucene into contrib hasn't appeared to help much. ==== I disagree Mark, locallucene hasn't been updated in 8 month on source forge http://locallucene.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/locallucene/trunk/ locallucene/<http://locallucene.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/locallucene/trunk/locallucene/> *168*<http://locallucene.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/locallucene/trunk/locallucene/?view=log> 8 months pjaol Added getQuery(Query) method to convert distance filter to a query allowing loca... Only localsolr has had work performed on it,while waiting to get something in Solr, spatial lucene has been slowly updated over time, by more than just I which is what open source and iteration is all about. If you want to wait for perfection, you have to wait. As for leaving spatial contribution in a hairy state, you care to clarify? On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > patrick o'leary wrote: > > Someone pulling an Al Gore (inventing the internet) on this isn't my > > concern, heck you can just google for some of the class names of > > locallucene and see how far spread it is, > Then whats this about: > > " > > but it's giving significant, 'impression of ownership' of a lot of work > that's been completed > by other folks." > > > what I am more concerned about > > > > "Future versions of these patches may include support for search with > > regular polygons, and the introduction of distance facets, allowing Solr > > users to be able to filter their results based on the calculated > distances." > > > > They're now 'flogging' recent and current work I and others are doing? > > > > ... not encouraging, and certainly not healthy for open source. > > > Doesn't sound that way to me. > > I'm going to be brash and request that there is commitment to adding a > basic > > Spatial feature set for distance searching (restricted by distance) & > > sorting > > to Solr's trunk by the end of December. Iterate and refactor as needed > after > > that. > > > > There should not be any more excuses to having this code out in the cold > as > > patches and external projects. > > > But your doing that yourself at source forge? Hasn't there been a lot of > work on an external LocalLucene, even after it was put into contrib? > While the > contrib version was left in a fairly hairy state? > > Thats just the nature of the license - but putting LocalLucene into > contrib hasn't appeared to help much. > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > >> Yonik Seeley wrote: > >> > >>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:22 AM, patrick o'leary <pj...@pjaol.com> > >>> > >> wrote: > >> > >>>> What spatial contributions have been contributed from this? > >>>> I'm only seeing some query parsing / multi-threading extensions, no > >>>> > >> shapes / > >> > >>>> SRID's etc > >>>> but it's giving significant, 'impression of ownership' of a lot of > work > >>>> that's been completed > >>>> by other folks. > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Looks like they acknowledge building on local solr and local lucene to > >>> > >> me: > >> > >>> """SSP started out its life as a patch for Solr Spatial Search > >>> (Solr-773) and Spatial Lucene (Lucene-1732) and extends Solr and > >>> Lucene with hereunto missing geodetic search functions (bounding boxes > >>> etc) while improving on the speed of the result and performance when > >>> dealing with a large data set through better query parsing and > >>> multi-threaded filtering. Also included are improved extensibility and > >>> documentation.""" > >>> > >>> And in a way, they do "own" their plugin - their customizations, > >>> packaging, etc (note: I haven't looked at it). And they offer support > >>> for it - which might be attractive to some companies that need > >>> supported geosearch now. > >>> > >>> It's also open source under the Apache license, so presumably we could > >>> borrow anything we want from it. > >>> > >>> -Yonik > >>> http://www.lucidimagination.com > >>> > >>> > >> I think Patrick is obviously referring to: However, in the last 6 months > >> support for spatial search has begun to be added to Apache Lucene and > >> Solr, much of which has been developed here at JTeam. > >> > >> "Much of which" is obviously a bit of an overstatement (to a great > >> degree or extent) when you look at all the work thats been done. > >> > >> Oh well though. So it goes. Its Apache - they could package it all up, > >> hide the code under the covers, put a notice saying some work was > >> derived from Solr, call it Solr: geo search edition, and essentially > >> take even more credit while adding little to nothing. I wouldn't sweat > it. > >> > >> > > > > > >
