lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lombard, Scott" <slomb...@KINGINDUSTRIES.COM>
Subject RE: RE: Vote thread started on general@lucene.apache.org
Date Thu, 30 Dec 2010 19:17:03 GMT
Marco,

My feeling would be to create strong automated conversion tools to allow java Lucene to be
ported in to .NET in as few steps and as possible.  The .net style goal is a noble one, but
will require a significant more commitment to the project in the future.  As each new version
of java Lucene will have to be integrated by hand into the .net version.

As the conversion tools get more advanced and robust .net style code may be implemented as
part of the automated conversion process.


Scott



-----Original Message-----
From: Marco Dissel [mailto:marco.dissel@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 1:16 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Cc: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: RE: Vote thread started on general@lucene.apache.org

What will be the goal of new committors? Convert the source into .net style
code? If yes, we should try to stop will all the spin-offs and concentrate
all the development in one project.
Op 30 dec. 2010 19:02 schreef "Lombard, Scott" <slombard@kingindustries.com>
het volgende:
> Grant,
>
> Thanks for your time explaining all the details. I will be willing work on
a proposal to put Lucene.Net back in to incubation. I will need other people
to step up and be committers as well. Heath has volunteered and as Grant has
stated 4 committers are needed to for incubation. Who else is willing to be
a committer?
>
> Grant I will definitely be taking you up on your offer to help on bring
Lucene.Net into incubation.
>
> Scott
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 12:32 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Vote thread started on general@lucene.apache.org
>
>
> On Dec 30, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Heath Aldrich wrote:
>
>> Hi Grant,
>>
>> Thanks for taking the time to respond.
>>
>> While I have developed extensively against Lucene.net, I do not possess
the java skills needed to do a port of the code... So, while I wouldn't mind
being a committer, I do not think I am qualified. (I guess if I was, I could
just use Lucene proper and that would be that)
>>
>> As to other duties of a committer, I think the ASF is perceived as a
black box of questions for most of us.
>>
>> For one, I don't think anyone outside the 4 committers even understand
*why* it is a good thing to be on the ASF vs. CodePlex, Sourceforge, etc.
Maybe if there was an understanding of the why, the requirements of the ASF
would make more sense. I think a lot of us right now just perceive the ASF
as the group that is wanting to kill Lucene.net.
>
> I don't think we have a desire to kill it, I just think we are faced with
the unfortunate reality that the project is already dead and now us on the
PMC have the unfortunate job of cleaning up the mess as best we can. Again,
it is not even that we want to see it go away, we on the PMC just don't want
to be responsible for it's upkeep. You give me the names of 4 people who are
willing to be committers (i.e. people willing to volunteer their time) and I
will do my best to get the project into the Incubator. However, I have to
tell you, my willingness to help is diminishing with every trip we take
around this same circle of discussion.
>
> Simply put, given the way the vote has gone so far, the Lucene PMC is no
longer interested in sustaining this project. If the community wishes to see
it live at the ASF then one of you had better step up and spend 20-30
minutes of your time writing up the draft proposal (most of it can be copied
and pasted) and circulating it. In fact, given the amount of time some of
you have no doubt spent writing on this and other related threads you could
have put together the large majority of the proposal, circulated the draft
and got other volunteers to help and already be moving forward in a positive
direction. Truth be told, I would do it, but I am explicitly not going to
because I think that if the community can't take that one step to move
forward, then it truly doesn't deserve to.
>
>>
>> I get your comments about the slower than slow development, but that is
also somewhat of a sign that it works. While 2.9.2 may be behind, it seems
very stable with very few issues. If we send the project to the attic, how
will anyone be able to submit bugfixes ever? Frankly, I use 2.9.2 every day
and have not found bugs in the areas that I use... but I'm sure they are in
there somewhere.
>>
>> As for the name, I thought Lucene.net was the name of the project back in
the SourceForge days...
>> So my question is based on the premise that "if the lucene.net name was
brought *to* ASF, why can the community not leave with it?"
>
> Again, IANAL, but just b/c it was improperly used beforehand does not mean
it is legally owned by some other entity. The Lucene name has been at the
ASF since 2001 and Lucene.NET is also now a part of the ASF. (If your
interested, go look at the discussions around iBatis and the movement of
that community to MyBatis)
>
> -Grant
>
>
> This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the
> use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may
> contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or
> constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient
> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or
> distribution of this message, or files associated with this message,
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error,
> please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting
> it from your computer. Thank you, King Industries, Inc.


This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may
contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or
constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or
distribution of this message, or files associated with this message,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting
it from your computer.  Thank you, King Industries, Inc.

Mime
View raw message