: filter again with the same facet. Also, when a facet has only one value, it : doesn't make sense to show it to the user, since searching with that facet : is just going to give the same result set again. So when facet.missing does : not work with facet.mincount, it is a bit of a hassle for us.... Will work : on handling it in our program.....Thank you for the clarification
yeah .. i totally unerstand where you are coming from, i'm just not certain that it's clear cut that we should change the current behavior since: 1) it's trivial to work arround client side; b) some other users might be depending on the current behavior and think that conceptually it doesn't make sense for facet.missing to consider facet.mincount. i should have said before but: feel free to open an issue baout this and propose a patch, i'm just not sure it's a slam dunk unless we make an easy way to configure it to continue working the current way as well. -Hoss
