lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Thompson <pierogi...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: Proposal Stage: Backwards Compatibility / Support
Date Fri, 31 Dec 2010 23:29:07 GMT
Maybe we could just bug-fix support the current 2.9.2 codebase unless people
really need something in 2.9.x

I think there would be a 3.0.x line-by-line port and a 3.0.x idiomatic
version.

I'd like to throw another idea into the mix which is perhaps the idiomatic
version could be created by an automated refactoring of the line-by-line. It
might be additional upfront work but might make it easier for future changes
from java lucene to be propagated down.

Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: mherndon@amptools.net [mailto:mherndon@amptools.net] On Behalf Of
Michael Herndon
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 1:28 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Proposal Stage: Backwards Compatibility / Support

*Backwards Compatibility / Support: *
This is definitely something we need to cover.

I'm guessing the obvious choice would be to continue the 2.9.X versions
under sharpen, maintain the current api thats has java idioms so that people
can continue to use it, release patches, ensure stability with the current
community. This would be important for people who have built products on top
of lucene.net.

The 3.0 version should probably match java in terms of breaking the api due
to the language changes or maybe even a separate project inside:
lucene.netredux (for lack of a better term at the moment).


*
*
--
Michael Herndon


Mime
View raw message