lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Herndon <mhern...@wickedsoftware.net>
Subject Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] Apache Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubating
Date Mon, 31 Oct 2011 18:43:58 GMT
@Prescott,

In name of getting this out the door and keeping momentum I'll put those
together and push that into svn sometime late tonight. **

Other things to do once released....  official nuget package, some website
love. and start using the twitter: LuceneDotNet account.  I can help with
these as well.

@all,

If everyone involved for this release could put some time aside after this
release to co-write a checklist/steps to put on the wiki for the release
process in one place, that would be awesome.


**reasoning.....
We've yet to get the SHFB installed on builds and thus I need to write up
some instructions for the installer as it been causing some pain for CI.
Once that hurdle is crossed, I'd like to work with a few people
contributors or committers to make sure others can create docs.  But for
now, there is no point in obstructing the release with that. We've made an
hard line effort at all things outstanding in the last few months and we
should keep with the momentum of getting this out the door.


- Michael





On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com>wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
> Michael - how do we stand with the sandcastle documentation generation?.
> I'm not familiar with using it, but we basically have no real documentation
> for this. It would be great to be able to generate documentation that we
> can then bundle with 2.9.4.
>
>
> Stefan - doc folder was left out intentionally for this reason. Also the
> Lib folder, I left out, I thought it was additional dll's that weren't part
> of Lucene that others might need. I can put that back in. Not even sure
> what the build.cmd file is, but I'll investigate and get it in there.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > From: bodewig@apache.org
> > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 07:00:08 +0100
> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] Apache Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubating
> >
> > On 2011-10-31, Prescott Nasser wrote:
> >
> > > Artifacts are located here:
> > > http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/2.9.4-incubating-RC1/
> >
> > Is there a tag in svn that is supposed to correspond to them? My guess
> > is <http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/2.9.4-incubating-RC1/>.
> > But then I find
> >
> > diff -ur svn/src/contrib/Similarity/Similar/MoreLikeThis.cs
> Apache-Lucene.Net-2.
> > 9.4-incubating-RC1.src/src/contrib/Similarity/Similar/MoreLikeThis.cs
> > --- svn/src/contrib/Similarity/Similar/MoreLikeThis.cs 2011-04-23
> 01:53:05.3476
> > 64000 +0200
> > +++
> Apache-Lucene.Net-2.9.4-incubating-RC1.src/src/contrib/Similarity/Similar/Mo
> > reLikeThis.cs 2011-10-30 19:35:42.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -769,7 +769,7 @@
> > {
> > for (int j = 0; j < text.Length; j++)
> > {
> > - AddTermFrequencies(new System.IO.StreamReader(text[
> > j]), termFreqMap, fieldName);
> > + AddTermFrequencies(new System.IO.StringReader(text[
> > j]), termFreqMap, fieldName);
> > }
> > }
> > }
> > @@ -820,7 +820,7 @@
> > /// </param>
> > /// <param name="fieldName">Used by analyzer for any special per-field
> > analysis
> > /// </param>
> > - private void AddTermFrequencies(System.IO.StreamReader r,
> System.Collections.IDictionary termFreqMap, System.String fieldName)
> > + private void AddTermFrequencies(System.IO.TextReader r,
> System.Collections.IDictionary termFreqMap, System.String fieldName)
> > {
> > TokenStream ts = analyzer.TokenStream(fieldName, r);
> > Lucene.Net.Analysis.Token token;
> >
> > so they don't match.
> >
> > The src ZIP doesn't contain build.cmd nor the doc and lib folders. Is
> > this intentional?
> >
> > Signatures and checksums match.
> >
> > The src ZIP contains .svn folders which I don't think they should. No
> > biggie just something to fix for the next release or RC. Same for some
> > .suo files and obj folders.
> >
> > The binary distribution needs LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt that I can't
> > seem to find. This forces a -1 from me.
> >
> > The only other test I'd perform was running RAT which I'll do shortly
> > and post the results here.
> >
> > Stefan
>

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