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] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
Date Thu, 29 Dec 2011 06:46:31 GMT
Yeah that would work

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Rory Plaire
Sent: 12/28/2011 10:05 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress

Oh, I see now, we need to import the issues as well as the changesets. I
guess I can just start to work on the Lucene 3.0.3 issues on trunk until
they are imported?

-r

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com>wrote:

>
> That's 40 issues that the Java Lucene team tagged as needed for 3.0.3
> release (so they are all closed atm) I will try to port many/most of these
> over this week into our JIRA so we can track them for ourselves.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ---------------------------------------- > From: geobmx540@hotmail.com >
> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 17:21:39
> -0800 > Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward
> progress > > > 40 issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+LUCENE+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide>
> > > > > Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 15:18:22 -0800 > > From:
> codekaizen@gmail.com > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > >
> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
> > > > > I'm not that proficient in JIRA yet, and can only find 22 open
> issues > > outstanding. Is this correct, or am I missing something? > > >
>
> -r > > > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote: > >
> >
> > You can look at the jira issues for Java lucene 3.0.3 and submit patches
> > > > for 2.9.4g that will bring it up. Worst case is well keep trying to >
> > > maintain a line by line and the g. Best case is we can use g as a jump
> > > > point to make it even more .net like and whatever work you do will
> help us > > > there as well > > > > > > Sent from my Windows
Phone > > >
> ________________________________ > > > From: Rory Plaire > > > Sent:
> 12/23/2011 2:27 PM > > > To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > > >
> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward progress
> > > > > > > So, if there was a very-occasional contributor who wanted
to
> put some time > > > into the project this weekend, is there a way to do it
> at this time? > > > I'm only interested in the generics port as well as
> making sure that the > > > translation offers (at least one-way)
> compatibility with Lucene indexes. > > > -r > > > > > > On
Fri, Dec 23,
> 2011 at 1:32 PM, Prescott Nasser > > >wrote: > > > > > > >
I don't know if
> we should do that - the generics is quite different from > > > > the line
> by line port. I would vote we do it personally - I know others > > > are >
> > > > not ok with it. > > > > > > > > What say other
people? > > > > > > >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone > > > > ________________________________
> > >
> > From: Scott Lombard > > > > Sent: 12/23/2011 11:21 AM > > >
> To:
> lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > > > > Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Merge
> 3.0.3 into trunk and other forward > > > progress > > > > > >
> > The
> Anonymous class issue is a readability issue not a functional change. > > >
> > So the release could go forward without it. The work should be continued
> > > > > in > > > > the 3.0.3 version. > > > > >
> > > Prescott are you
> planning on merging the 2.9.4g into the trunk then > > > 3.0.3? > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -----Original
> Message----- > > > > > From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx540@hotmail.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 4:37 PM > > > >
> To:
> lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > > > > > Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net]
> Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other > > > > > forward progress > >
> > > > > >
> > > Im not as familiar with the g branch - the notice issue is > > > >
>
> current, seems like the general incubator has been digging > > > > >
> everyone for it lately. > > > > > > > > > > Im not sure
about the anon or
> the generics unfortunately > > > > > > > > > > Sent from
my Windows Phone >
> > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: Rory
Plaire > > >
> > > Sent: 12/22/2011 12:58 PM > > > > > To:
> lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org > > > > > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net]
> Merge 3.0.3 into trunk and other > > > > > forward progress > >
> > > > > >
> > > I was just looking at the issues for 2.9.4g since I have a > > > >
>
> bit of time to put against them in the coming week. They are here: > > > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/ > > > >
> > 12316479. Are these current? If so I can just keep going in > > > >
> the
> direction DIGY set to help close them. > > > > > > > > > >
-r > > > > > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:12 AM, michael herndon < > > >
> >
> mherndon@wickedsoftware.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >
> +1 I believe
> you tagged the latest during release. Code be > > > > > reverted >
> > > >
> > +or a > > > > > > new branch to create a patch for 2.9.4 if something
> major happens > > > > > > since we have scm in place, so I think merging
it
> would not > > > > > be damaging in any way. > > > > > >
> > > > > > for the
> 2.9.4g branch, I would do a quick scan to see if > > > > > there are any
>
> > > > > > outstanding tickets or input from DIGY or anyone else who >
> > >
> > put in major > > > > > > time on that branch. If there are things
that
> are > > > > > outstanding, throw > > > > > > together
a quick list that
> people can pull from and work through. > > > > > > > > > >
> > I can throw
> up some tweets and point towards this thread if > > > > > you would like.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Michael > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu,
> Dec 22, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Prescott Nasser > > > > > > > > >
> > >wrote: > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Its been pretty quiet as of late.
I'd like to merge
> 3.0.3 > > > > > into the > > > > > > > trunk and
wipe out the branch. > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Im going to do this by lazy consensus
since responses
> are > > > > > a little > > > > > > > difficult to
come by. Im going to do
> this Jan 5th - after the > > > > > > > holidays to give everyone
the
> opportunity to respond if > > > > > they think > > > > >
> > this is a bad
> > > > > > > idea. > > > > > > > I will do it quicker
if people respond it
> is a good idea however. > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> I am also going to
> package up 2.9.4g the week between the two > > > > > > > holidays
- if
> there is anything that needs to get done > > > > > lets get it taken care
> of. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Finally, if
I dont hear any other way in
> the next day or two I am > > > > > > > going > > > >
> > to > > > > > > >
> copy the Java lucene jira issues for 3.0.3 release into > > > > > our
jira
> so > > > > > > > that > > > > > > we > >
> > > > > can track and start
> knocking them down. > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> Happy holidays all, > > > >
> > > > Prescott > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> Sent from my Windows Phone > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >

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