lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Johnson, Scott" <SJohn...@onsite3.com>
Subject RE: 2.4.0
Date Mon, 08 Dec 2008 14:45:09 GMT
Please do commit 2.3.2 as a release that "one can just download".

I have seen multiple cases where the lack of a more up-to-date stable
release of Lucene.NET has slowed corporate adoption and introduced
needless version incompatibilities.  This release would help push our
development partners and toolkit vendors towards using the latest
technology.

Thanks,
Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: Digy [mailto:digydigy@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 6:54 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: 2.4.0

Hi Doug,

 

The bug(LUCENENET-106) carried over from v2.1 to v2.3.1 and v2.3.2,   a
newly discovered one(LUCENENET-164)    and an improvement(LUCENENET-160
-
since there are a lot of exceptions while checking whether a string is a
real-number or not) are waiting to be fixed.  

And there is also no stable release for Lucene.Net community after
v2.0.0.4 where one can just download and use Lucene.Net without
searching the JIRA issues and applying some patches(like I do).

 

Therefore, I would prefer,first, to commit a version
ready-to-release(2.3.2) and then, while dealing with the
apache-release-process, continue with the development of the v2.4

 

In the mean time, try to keep yourself alive J

 

 

DIGY.

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Doug Sale [mailto:dougsale@gmail.com] 

Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:19 PM

To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org

Subject: 2.4.0

 

Folks,

 

I've been converting the 2.3.2 code to 2.4.0 and anticipate having a
clean

build by Monday AM.  There will be bugs, I'm sure.  Also, there are some
new

classes that I've only stubbed out, and some issues I've identified that

would be best hashed out (by the community) prior to addressing.

 

I am curious how we should proceed to work on the 2.4.0 conversion.
Should

we tag 2.3.2 and have the 2.4.0 code be HEAD?  Is there a better-suited

approach?

 

I would like to get this code into SVN *somewhere* (in case I get hit by
a

bus, laptop in hand).  Honestly, I want to preserve our momentum and be

prepared to work on the Lucene.Net 3.0 version as it becomes available
(or

sooner...).

 

Please respond with any thoughts/ideas?

 

Thanks,

Doug


Mime
View raw message