lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.net nuget
Date Thu, 01 Dec 2011 16:56:38 GMT

> - Lucene.Net to contain the core
> - Lucene.Contrib to contain the contrib and dep on Lucene.Net (there is
> no point in shipping contrib alone)
> - Lucene.Net.Sample to contain some samples (and a reference to
> Lucene.Net)


+1

 

> - Lucene: either empty with just a reference to Lucene.Net or just a
> README and description that asks to update reference to another package
>
> What do you think? Biggest problem is that Lucene is the de-facto offical
> pkg id. Is it ok to switch to the Lucene.Net brand? or do you think we
> should use keep the Lucene brand? IIUC we want to use our .NET brand
> instead of the "java" one.
>


I think we want to change to .Net, even if we have to blank out Lucene or put in a readme
(I'd vote for blanking it out imo).

 

> I can grant ownership right to other people so someone else can work on it
> if I get hit by a bus.
> Prescott and Michael?
>

 

Those are probably good

 


>
> Simone
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Simone Chiaretta <simone.chiaretta@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Guys, if you want I can take ownership of the whole NuGet thing, from
> > getting hold of the right package id, to publishing the nuget pkgs, and
> > maybe adding a quickstart pkg
> > Let me know if it's ok, or someone is already working on that.
> >
> > Simone
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Michael Herndon <
> > mherndon@wickedsoftware.net> wrote:
> >
> >> if you look inside of trunk/build/scripts/ there are three nuspecs
> >> under their respective folder names.
> >> all, contrib, and core.
> >>
> >> all is basically a dependency on contrib & core.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > We also discussed a contrib package - but we never really had a decision
> >> > if we should be doing one package per contrib project or a single
> >> contrib
> >> > project.
> >> >
> >> > ----------------------------------------
> >> > > Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:00:24 +0100
> >> > > From: simone.chiaretta@gmail.com
> >> > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> >> > > Subject: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.net nuget
> >> > >
> >> > > Dears,
> >> > > now, in the .NET ecosystem of opensource libraries it is super
> >> important
> >> > to
> >> > > have the nuget package released in sync with the binary release.
> >> Actually
> >> > > many project are even just releasing the nuget package.
> >> > >
> >> > > Currently there is a bit of confusion in the list of packages:
> >> > >
> >> > > - There is "Lucene" with project id "lucene"by Apache SF relased on
> >> jan
> >> > > 11 frozen on version 2.9.2.2 http://nuget.org/List/Packages/Lucene
> >> > > - There is "Lucene.Net - (strong named 2.0/4.0) - 2.9.2.2" with
> >> project
> >> > > id "lucene.net" released on Sept 11 still by Apache SF on version
> >> > > 2.9.2.2 http://nuget.org/List/Packages/Lucene.Net
> >> > >
> >> > > I guess ppl think the good one is "lucene" b/c it has 3k download
vs
> >> 173
> >> > of
> >> > > the other (almost 300 x month vs 85 x month)
> >> > >
> >> > > But nothing yet on 2.9.4.
> >> > >
> >> > > I suggest we reorganize the Nuget packages doing:
> >> > > 1 - *delete *the "lucene" package (or add a new version with just
a
> >> > readme
> >> > > file that clearly marks it is obsolete if not possible to remove the
> >> > > project)
> >> > > 2 - *rename *the "lucene.net" package public title to "Lucene.net"
> >> > (remove
> >> > > the version number as they are not supposed to stay in the name)
> >> > > 3 - *create *a "lucene.net.strong" and move here the strongly signed
> >> > > libraries
> >> > > 4 - *upgrade both* to 2.9.4
> >> > >
> >> > > I think the script to create the nuget pkg is already in place, if
> >> not,
> >> > let
> >> > > me know and I'll look into making one.
> >> > >
> >> > > As last thing, I just want to stress on the importance of having a
> >> NuGet
> >> > > pkg nowadays to be relevant in the .NET space
> >> > >
> >> > > Simone
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Simone Chiaretta
> >> > > Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> >> > > Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> >> > > RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> >> > > twitter: @simonech
> >> > >
> >> > > Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> >> > > "Life is short, play hard"
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Simone Chiaretta
> > Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> > Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> > RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> > twitter: @simonech
> >
> > Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> > "Life is short, play hard"
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Simone Chiaretta
> Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> twitter: @simonech
>
> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> "Life is short, play hard" 		 	   		  
Mime
View raw message