Ahh, OK. Meaning Solr will have to remove deprecated support, which means Solr's next released version would be a major release? Ie 2.0?
Mike On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Michael McCandless > <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: >> On version numbering... my inclination would be to let Solr and Lucene >> use their own version numbers (don't sync them up). I know it'd >> simplify our lives to have the same version across the board, but >> these numbers are really for our users, telling them when big changes >> were made, back compat broken, etc. I think that trumps dev >> convenience. > > Be sure to consider the deprecations removal, its not possible for > Solr to move to Lucene's trunk without this. > > Here are two examples of necessary deprecation removals in the branch > so that Solr can use Lucene's trunk: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1820 > http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/f07da8e4d69f5bfe/removal_of_deprecated_htmlstrip_tokenizer_factories > > It seems to be the consensus that people want a major version change > number when this is done. > > So this is an example where the version numbers of Solr really do > relate to Lucene, if we want them to share the same trunk. > > > -- > Robert Muir > rcm...@gmail.com >
