On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree it's mainly API wise, but there are other issues - largely due > to Lucene right now - consider the bugs that have been dug up this year > on the 4.x line because flex has been such a large rewrite deep in > Lucene. We wouldn't do flex on the 3.x stable line and it's taken a > while for everything to shake out in 4.x (and it's prob still swaying).
Right. That big difference also has implications for the 3.x line too though - possible backports of new features like field collapsing or per-segment faceting that involve the flex API would involve a good amount of re-writing (along with the introduction of new bugs). I'd put my money on 4.0-dev being actually *more* stable for these new features. -Yonik http://lucenerevolution.org Lucene/Solr Conference, Boston Oct 7-8
