Thanks you very much. I know the feeling, I've definitely had times when I just got busy and didn't reply, but I've had plenty to do that didn't require that to be done first, so no worries.
Thanks, Thomas On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Mark Allan <mark.al...@ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Sorry for not replying before now - I've had your email flagged in my mail > client to remind me to reply, but I've been so busy recently I never got > round to it. > > I'll package up the necessary java files and send you the attachment > directly instead of posting a zip file to the mailing list, which in most > places would be against list etiquette. > > Mark > > > On 16 Aug 2010, at 3:01 pm, Thomas Joiner wrote: > > Sorry to bother you, but since I haven't had a reply in a week, I figured >> I'd try asking again... >> >> What build of Solr are you using personally? Are you just using a nightly >> build, or is there a specific build that you are using? Has it had any >> major screw-ups for you? >> >> And I still would love to see your code. >> >> Regards, >> Thomas >> >> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Thomas Joiner <thomas.b.joi...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> I'd love to see your code on this, however what I've really been >>> wondering >>> is the following: When did AbstractSubTypeFieldType get added? It isn't >>> in >>> 1.4.1 (as far as I can tell that's the latest one that is bundled on >>> their >>> site). So, do I just need to grab it from subversion, and build it? And >>> if >>> so, is there a particular revision that I should go with? Or should I >>> just >>> pull trunk and use that, and last of all, is trunk stable enough to be >>> used >>> in production? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Thomas >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Mark Allan <mark.al...@ed.ac.uk> wrote: >>> >>> On 9 Aug 2010, at 1:01 pm, Otis Gospodnetic wrote: >>>> >>>> Mark, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> A good way to get your changes/improvements into Solr is by putting >>>>> them >>>>> in >>>>> JIRA. Please see http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> Otis >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Otis, >>>> >>>> For the class which requires only minor modifications, I tested it to >>>> ensure it doesn't break existing compatibility/functionality, and then I >>>> created an issue in JIRA and uploaded a patch: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1986 >>>> >>>> I then posted a message about it to the list and got the following >>>> responses. >>>> >>>> On 7 Jul 2010, at 6:24 pm, Yonik Seeley wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Originally, I had intended that it was just for one Field Sub Type, >>>>>> thinking that if we ever wanted multiple sub types, that a new, >>>>>> separate >>>>>> class would be needed >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Right - this was my original thinking too. AbstractSubTypeFieldType is >>>>> only a convenience class to create compound types... people can do it >>>>> other >>>>> ways. >>>>> >>>>> -Yonik >>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> When I replied to ask if that meant the changes wouldn't be included, I >>>> got no response. As there's been no activity in JIRA, I didn't bother >>>> putting any of my other changes into JIRA as they all relied on that >>>> one. >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > >
