lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From digy digy <digyd...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
Date Tue, 29 Mar 2011 19:41:14 GMT
We already have a release for .NET 2.0 (Lucene.Net 2.9.2).  So, jumping to
4.0 shouldn't  be a problem for Lucene,Net community.
DIGY

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Troy Howard <thoward37@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sounds good to me. I have done this previously in a local branch and
> noticed massive performance improvements. Removing all the casting in
> the library makes for dramatic speedups.
>
> As a side note: Chris Currens is in the process of benchmarking
> Lucene.Net running under .NET 4.0 vs 3.5 vs 2.0... This benchmarking
> is to prove what we found in our production deployments... Compiling
> and deploying as a .NET 4.0 assembly results in major improvements in
> both speed and correct memory handling (memory leaks magically
> disappear). We want to prove this with benchmarks before publishing a
> definitive statement about this however.
>
> If this is the case, there might be a very compelling reason to move
> forward to 4.0 runtime for Lucene.Net.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:23 PM, digy digy <digydigy@gmail.com> wrote:
> > After this directory layout changes; what about replacing ArrayLists,
> > Hashtables etc, with appropriate Generics?  This would bring us very
> close
> > to lucene 3.0.3 (and not hard to do with the help of VS).
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Troy Howard <thoward37@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds good. I'll make a tag prior to starting the directory changes,
> >> but I'll commit changes to trunk.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Troy
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM, digy digy <digydigy@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > +1.  No pending commits.
> >> > A copy of the current trunk somewhere else(tag, branches etc.) would
> be
> >> good
> >> > too.
> >> >
> >> > DIGY.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Troy Howard <thoward37@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
> >> >> significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
> >> >> (which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
> >> >> positive.
> >> >>
> >> >> Barring any objections, this vote passes.
> >> >>
> >> >> Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on
> 2.9.4
> >> >> finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
> >> >> changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
> >> >> start on that this week.
> >> >>
> >> >> If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
> >> >> this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
> >> >> Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
> >> >> not be able to find the appropriate files.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Troy
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <
> >> geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Quick Recap:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We have Troy's original proposal here:
> >> >>
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > bin/
> >> >> > build/   (various solution and project files)
> >> >> >     vs2008/
> >> >> >     vs2010/
> >> >> > doc/
> >> >> > lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the
> source
> >> and
> >> >> go
> >> >> > src/
> >> >> >    contrib/
> >> >> >    core/
> >> >> >    demo/
> >> >> > test/
> >> >> >    contrib/
> >> >> >    core/
> >> >> >    demo/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder
-
> >> because
> >> >> we have extra folders:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> >> >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders
> above,
> >> and
> >> >> finding a better name for contrib.net.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ----------------------------------------
> >> >> >> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
> >> >> >> From: digydigy@gmail.com
> >> >> >> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> >> >> >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for
Project
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Well, not really "core".
> >> >> >> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to
> /src/contrib/analyzers
> >> >> (but
> >> >> >> they are not ports from java).
> >> >> >> The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something
like
> >> >> >> Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> DIGY
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder
name to
> >> >> >> > ~/src/contrib/core ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if
they are
> >> solid,
> >> >> >> > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our
new
> philosophy
> >> >> >> > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means
diverging
> >> from
> >> >> >> > Java Lucene to do it.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> >> > Troy
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces
> certain
> >> >> files in
> >> >> >> > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net?
What are
> >> they?
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > If they are plugins / additional contributions like
snowball,
> etc
> >> -
> >> >> why
> >> >> >> > not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff
in
> contrib?
> >> Do
> >> >> we
> >> >> >> > need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java
version?
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > ----------------------------------------
> >> >> >> > >> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
> >> >> >> > >> From: digydigy@gmail.com
> >> >> >> > >> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> >> >> >> > >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory
Layout for
> >> Project
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >> 0
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/
. It could
> be
> >> >> something
> >> >> >> > >> like
> >> >> >> > >> Analyzers
> >> >> >> > >> Highlighter
> >> >> >> > >> Similarity
> >> >> >> > >> ...
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >> (Maybe, we should find a different name for
contrib.net. It
> >> >> contains
> >> >> >> > >> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which
are not available
> in
> >> >> >> > >> Lucene.java)
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >> DIGY
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser
wrote:
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib
folder you
> >> also
> >> >> have
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > >> > number of tests in there...
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > Also, is it necessary to have all the sub
folders? For the
> >> most
> >> >> part
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > >> > stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why
the secondary
> >> folder?
> >> >> >> > Unless
> >> >> >> > >> > that is a requirement of NUnit to have
the structure that
> way
> >> it
> >> >> seems
> >> >> >> > a bit
> >> >> >> > >> > cluttered.
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > I would think something like
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/
> >> >> >> > >> > src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > instead of
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
> >> >> >> > >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > I don't know how people feel about that
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > ~P
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > ----------------------------------------
> >> >> >> > >> > > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
> >> >> >> > >> > > From: mherndon@wickedsoftware.net
> >> >> >> > >> > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> >> >> >> > >> > > CC: thoward37@gmail.com
> >> >> >> > >> > > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New
Directory Layout for
> >> >> Project
> >> >> >> > >> > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > +1
> >> >> >> > >> > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh
files for letting
> >> >> people
> >> >> >> > >> > executing
> >> >> >> > >> > > the build or just executing other
tools from the command
> >> line,
> >> >> would
> >> >> >> > >> > those
> >> >> >> > >> > > have a place in /bin or somewhere
els? This is that
> someone
> >> can
> >> >> just
> >> >> >> > >> > export
> >> >> >> > >> > > PATH = / SET PATH= to that one folder
and then be able to
> >> >> execute
> >> >> >> > those
> >> >> >> > >> > > commands from one location?
> >> >> >> > >> > >
> >> >> >> > >> > >
> >> >> >> > >> > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy
Howard wrote:
> >> >> >> > >> > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > All,
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > We'd like to update the project
directory
> >> structure/layout.
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > See below for a proposed layout.
I've also uploaded an
> >> >> example
> >> >> >> > which
> >> >> >> > >> > > > you can navigate at:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > NOTE: This will not build!! I
just put things in the
> >> >> appropriate
> >> >> >> > >> > > > places without updating the solution/project
files to
> show
> >> >> how we
> >> >> >> > >> > > > might lay things out. Also, I
included NUnit as an
> example
> >> of
> >> >> a
> >> >> >> > >> > > > third-party dependency that we
might include in the
> >> >> repository
> >> >> >> > under
> >> >> >> > >> > > > 'lib'. We of course will *not*
be distributing NUnit in
> >> this
> >> >> >> > manner,
> >> >> >> > >> > > > due to licensing restrictions.
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Ok, disclaimer over...
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Please vote on this layout, or
suggest a modification
> or
> >> >> >> > alternative
> >> >> >> > >> > > > layout.
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Voting will be open for 72 hours.
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > [ ] +1 Use this directory structure
exactly as
> described,
> >> or
> >> >> with
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > >> > > > minor modification
> >> >> >> > >> > > > [ ] 0 Use a different structure
(described in response)
> >> >> >> > >> > > > [ ] -1 Do not change the directory
structure at all
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Text description of directory
schema:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Build Files:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \build
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \build\VS2008
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \build\VS2010
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Source Projects:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \src
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \src\contrib
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \src\core
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \src\demo
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \src\contrib\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \src\core\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \src\demo\
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Test Projects:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \test
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \test\contrib
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \test\core
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \test\demo
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \test\contrib\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \test\core\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \test\demo\
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Product Documentation:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \doc
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \doc\contrib
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \doc\core
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \doc\demo
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \doc\contrib\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \doc\core\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \doc\demo\
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Third-Party Dependencies:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \lib
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \lib\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \lib\\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \lib\\\
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > Binary Builds:
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \bin
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \bin\contrib
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \bin\core
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \bin\demo
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \bin\contrib\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \bin\core\
> >> >> >> > >> > > > \bin\demo\
> >> >> >> > >> > > >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

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