lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]" <>
Subject RE: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your Thoughts
Date Thu, 22 Sep 2011 01:00:56 GMT
With all due respect, it's myopic opinions like yours and Michael's (his
leans more towards apathy) which will harm the ability to get the project
into the hands of people.

I think (hope?) it can be agreed upon that the more that people are aware of
Lucene.NET, the better it is for the project in general, and most
importantly, the more potential that you have that someone will *contribute
back* to it (and given what Lucene.NET has gone through in the past year, it
desperately needs that participation).

The fact of the matter is that Nuget puts packages in the hands of .NET
developers, that leads to exposure and regardless of personal opinions on
whether or not they *like* Nuget, it can't be denied that it's an
*extremely* popular way to get libraries into people's projects.

If you want to quibble over the actual numbers (and the definition of
"extremely popular") then that's fine, but here are the numbers you want:

If you want to just tell that audience to take a leap, that's fine, but I
think it would be foolish to do so otherwise.

Additionally, given that Lucene.NET is already on Nuget, isn't there *any*
concern that there isn't an official distro?  Aren't you concerned about the
integrity of the brand that so many of you fought to keep alive over the
past year?  There's no guarantee that what's on Nuget will be the official
releases/builds that come out of this project, and I'm a little surprised
there isn't more concern over that aspect either.

Just my $0.02

- Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: Digy [] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 7:06 PM
Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your Thoughts

I am not against it, but personally think it as a toy.
I am from the generation where people used vi to write codes.


-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Powell []
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 1:56 AM
Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your Thoughts

Any particular reason you guys are not interested in NuGet?

Aaron Powell
MVP - Internet Explorer (Development) | FunnelWeb Team Member | | Skype: aaron.l.powell |
Github | BitBucket 

-----Original Message-----
From: Digy []
Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2011 7:42 AM
Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your Thoughts

Sorry, but I feel the same as Neal.


-----Original Message-----
From: Granroth, Neal V. []
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 6:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your Thoughts

No interest in Nuget whatsoever.

- Neal

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Herndon []
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:57 PM
Subject: [Lucene.Net] Nuget, Lucene.Net, and Your Thoughts

We're taking a quick poll over the next few days to see how people would
like use Lucene.Net through Nuget on the developers mailing list**

Currently version 2.9.2 is hosted on, but that package was not
create by the project maintainers, thus nuget is not currently set up in
source.  Going forward, we would like to continue what someone else started
by creating nuget packages for Lucene.Net.

Right now there are two packages: Lucene & Lucene.Contrib.  My question to
the community is do you wish to finer grain packages, i.e. a package for
each contrib project or continue to keep it simple.

The granular approach will let you use only what you need. We can also
create additional higher level packages which have dependencies on the other
ones.   Possibly a Lucene.Net-Essentials and Lucene.Net-Full.

Or we can keep it simple and continue with only two packages.

My concerns are that the granular approach might overwhelm people with
choice. The simple choice might be considered bloat for importing and then
installing assemblies that you might never use.

Another topic to converse about is would you like to see an out-of-band
project nuget feed for  nightly builds, branches with new or experimental
features, or stable code snapshots for a projected release?

** when you post, please respond to  This
was posted to both lists to make sure everyone subscribed to both lists has
a chance to voice their use cases or concerns.

Checked by AVG -
Version: 2012.0.1809 / Virus Database: 2085/4510 - Release Date: 09/21/11


Checked by AVG -
Version: 2012.0.1809 / Virus Database: 2085/4510 - Release Date: 09/21/11

View raw message