lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sean Carpenter" <stcarpen...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Current Status/Plans for Lucene.Net 2.3
Date Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:21:14 GMT
I was able to apply all of the suggested patches and I currently get 7 test
failures.  I haven't had a chance to dig into them yet, but one thing that
took me some time was getting everything set up to build and run the tests.
 I was thinking of contributing a NAnt build file that would make it easier
for people to get set up and running.
Is there any interest in that (or is someone already working on it)?

Thanks,
Sean

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 7:35 AM, Sean Carpenter <stcarpenter@gmail.com>wrote:

> Doug,Thanks for the update.  I'll apply those patches this weekend and see
> what I come up with.
>
> Sean
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Doug Sale <dougsale@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sean,
>>
>> Currently, there are two people working on the 2.3.1 port - myself, and
>> DIGY.  Neither of us are committers, but the understanding is that we soon
>> will be.
>>
>> IMHO, there are 7 outstanding patches across 6 JIRA issues that should be
>> applied to SVN HEAD:
>> LUCENENET-135 SupportClass.patch
>> LUCENENET-143 TestStressIndexing2.patch, FieldsReader.patch
>> LUCENENET-145 DocumentsWriter.patch
>> LUCENENET-146 SegmentTermPositionVector.patch
>> LUCENENET-152 SegmentInfos.patch
>> LUCENENET-155 SetUp.patch
>>
>> After applying said patches, there remain unit test failures in
>> TestStressIndexing.TestStressIndexAndSearching() (intermittent exceptions)
>> and TestSpans.TestSpanNearOrdered0[2-4]() (2 search results' relevance
>> ranking are swapped).
>>
>> I am currently attempting to resolve these issues.  Any and all
>> assistance,
>> however, is welcome.  A first step would be to apply these patches to the
>> SVN HEAD and verify that your test results match mine.
>>
>> Additionally, on most machines TestHugeRamFile.TestHugeFile() will fail
>> due
>> to a lack of physical memory (and might crash VS and/or your system).
>>  This
>> can be alleviated by reducing the size requirement in the unit test.
>>
>> The current committers are responsible for reviewing these patches,
>> applying
>> them when worthy, and determining when the code is ready for release.
>>
>> Also - I have a local version of the code with the 2.3.2 changes ported,
>> ready-to-go, once the current batch of patches have been applied and the
>> remaining issues have been resolved.
>>
>> -Doug
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Sean Carpenter <stcarpenter@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > I am curious as to the current state of the 2.3.1 port.  These doesn't
>> seem
>> > to be much activity on the dev list or in the JIRA, and there are
>> several
>> > outstanding patches in the JIRA.  When I checked out the code this
>> morning
>> > and ran the tests, I got a bunch of failures and an exception that
>> caused
>> > NUnit to close.
>> > I'd really like to see Lucene.Net keep up with the Java version as we
>> have
>> > a
>> > couple of existing projects and a few new ones at work that utilize
>> Lucene.
>> >  What can I do to help?  Is there a way to get the current outstanding
>> > patches applied to the trunk so that we have a common base to work from?
>> >  I'm happy to work on patches for the outstanding test failures, once
>> it's
>> > easier to determine which ones are still outstanding.
>> >
>> > Any thoughts?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Sean Carpenter
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message