lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Herndon <mhern...@amptools.net>
Subject RE: 3.0.3
Date Mon, 24 Sep 2012 01:13:06 GMT
We need to tell infra to update the mirror scripts. The same thing
happened when lucene.net went back into incubation a year or so ago.


Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Itamar Syn-Hershko
Sent: 9/23/2012 7:04 PM
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: Re: 3.0.3
Yeah, sorry about that, the constraints of working on huge projects like
this using git-svn...

On that note - I believe Infra did a lousy job moving the SVN tree. I have
no way of supporting the claim, just had very hard time re-basing the
commit history locally and when I re-cloned everything the history I was
able to view was up until the move, not before. The github mirror isn't up
to date, too. I believe they did some sort of copy-delete instead of
remaping. But again - more of a feeling than knowledge.

On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Christopher Currens <
currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it was intended for work to be done in the 3.0.3 branch, but
> work was actually done in trunk.  I would double check that there are
> no lingering commits in the 3.0.3 branch that aren't in trunk, or I
> would just merge trunk into 3.0.3 and cut it from that.
>
> I have a feeling that there might be commits present in one and not the
> other.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > We can do extra releases of contrib as it gets updated. Great work
> Itamar, this will be a great addition.  Quick question to everyone before I
> cut the code - I notice the updates Itamar made were to trunk, if I branch
> the trunk to a new 3.0.3 and wipe out the current branch will that work? Or
> were there specifics things put in place in 3.0.3 that never made it to
> trunk for some reason?
> >  > Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 11:06:15 +0200
> >> Subject: Re: 3.0.3
> >> From: itamar@code972.com
> >> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >>
> >> Everything works great and as far as I'm concerned we are up for a
> release
> >>
> >> That being said, the spatial module is still being worked on and much is
> >> going to change until Lucene 4 will be released. We probably want to
> issue
> >> another 3.0.3 release for the spatial module once significant changes
> are
> >> made to it?
> >>
> >> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > OK I'm doing with the porting work, and all tests pass but 1 in a
> certain
> >> > circumstances. I'll send an email about this in a sec.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> itamar@code972.com>wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Only started working. will complete during the weekend
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Prescott Nasser <
> geobmx540@hotmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Itamar - you happy with the commits? or do you need more time?
> >> >>>  > From: geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >> >>> > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > Subject: RE: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 21:51:07 -0700
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Alright, sorry - just got home, doing this was first on my
list..
> >> >>> >  > Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 06:50:24 +0300
> >> >>> > > Subject: Re: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > From: itamar@code972.com
> >> >>> > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > No matter, I'm good now. Thanks..
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Prescott Nasser <
> >> >>> geobmx540@hotmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > > If nobody beats me to it, ill do it tonight
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> >> >>> > > > ________________________________
> >> >>> > > > From: Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >> >>> > > > Sent: 9/19/2012 1:05 PM
> >> >>> > > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > > > Subject: Re: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > Still having hard time getting my environment setup.
Can any
> of
> >> >>> you guys
> >> >>> > > > with commit karma commit a small change to one of
the files in
> >> >>> trunk (add a
> >> >>> > > > row to .gitignore or something), this should resolve
some
> issue
> >> >>> I'm having.
> >> >>> > > > Thanks :)
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko
<
> >> >>> itamar@code972.com
> >> >>> > > > >wrote:
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > > Due to the SVN change my local repos were invalidated,
been
> >> >>> re-cloning
> >> >>> > > > for
> >> >>> > > > > the past 12 hours and still not completed.
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > This will have to be delayed a couple more
days, sorry about
> >> >>> that.
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko
<
> >> >>> itamar@code972.com
> >> >>> > > > >wrote:
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >> Lol
> >> >>> > > > >>
> >> >>> > > > >> Prescott, I should have it all for you
by Monday
> >> >>> > > > >>
> >> >>> > > > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Prescott
Nasser <
> >> >>> geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >> >>> > > > >wrote:
> >> >>> > > > >>
> >> >>> > > > >>> pos - I have a mental image of playing
chess with you all
> as
> >> >>> the pieces
> >> >>> > > > >>> now..
> >> >>> > > > >>>
> >> >>> > > > >>> > Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 07:49:42
-0700
> >> >>> > > > >>> > Subject: Re: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > > >>> > From: currens.chris@gmail.com
> >> >>> > > > >>> > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > > > >>> >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > I get why svn and website needed
to move, but why did
> you
> >> >>> move Itamar
> >> >>> > > > >>> as
> >> >>> > > > >>> > well?  IGNORE ME.  That was a
terrible joke.  English
> is fun.
> >> >>> > > > >>> >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:46 AM,
Prescott Nasser <
> >> >>> > > > >>> geobmx540@hotmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>> > > > >>> >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > Itamar, svn and website are
moved. I have artifacts
> more
> >> >>> or less
> >> >>> > > > >>> ready to
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > roll - where do you stand
with the Spatial updates?
> Should
> >> >>> we wait
> >> >>> > > > a
> >> >>> > > > >>> bit to
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > get them or will you need
considerable more time?
> >> >>> > > > >>> > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > From: geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > Subject: RE: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012
07:54:44 -0700
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > I'm sure at a minimum
we'd need a vote - probably
> should
> >> >>> get
> >> >>> > > > >>> community
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > consensus as well. At the
moment I'm trying to keep up
> >> >>> with all the
> >> >>> > > > >>> other
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > changes moving from incubator
to a tlp. I'll reach
> out to
> >> >>> infra on
> >> >>> > > > >>> the
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > process though.
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > Date: Mon, 10 Sep
2012 17:43:56 +0300
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > Subject: Re: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > From: itamar@code972.com
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > No JIRA tickets,
a couple of locally fixed bugs,
> a fix
> >> >>> for this
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > issue<
> >> >>> > > > >>> > >
> >> >>> > > > >>>
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4342?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13447823#comment-13447823
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > >,
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > and bringing Spatial4n
up to speed with the latest
> >> >>> official
> >> >>> > > > >>> release of
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > spatial4j. I'm
mid-work on all of those. This is
> >> >>> mostly updates
> >> >>> > > > >>> but 2
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > of
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > the bugs may severely
affect results and sorting.
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > Speaking of SVN
- what would be the process for
> >> >>> pushing towards
> >> >>> > > > >>> a move
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > to
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > git? would we need
a vote?
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > On Mon, Sep 10,
2012 at 5:36 PM, Prescott Nasser <
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > geobmx540@hotmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > I was going
to put artifacts up for a vote after
> >> >>> moving SVN
> >> >>> > > > >>> this
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > weekend,
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > but found
out I needed INFRA to move it. I was
> >> >>> waiting,
> >> >>> > > > >>> because we
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > have
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > some links
in the help files that I didn't want
> to
> >> >>> update
> >> >>> > > > >>> without
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > the new
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > svn set.
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Do you have
JIRA tickets for the bugs? How
> severe
> >> >>> are they? I
> >> >>> > > > >>> guess
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > we
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > could wait,
anyone else have opinions?
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Date:
Mon, 10 Sep 2012 02:33:59 +0300
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Subject:
Re: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > From:
itamar@code972.com
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > Since
this have been delayed thus far, if we
> can
> >> >>> release
> >> >>> > > > >>> 3.0.3 next
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > Monday
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > that
would be great - I'll be able to push a
> >> >>> couple of more
> >> >>> > > > >>> last
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > minute
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > bug
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > fixes
to the spatial module, and also merge
> trunk
> >> >>> with the
> >> >>> > > > >>> working
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > branch.
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > On Tue,
Sep 4, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Prescott
> Nasser <
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > geobmx540@hotmail.com
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >wrote:
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
If you guys have time could you merge them
> into
> >> >>> 3.0.3.
> >> >>> > > > >>> Unless
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > someone
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > has
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
objections, I'm going to cut the artifacts
> in
> >> >>> the next
> >> >>> > > > day
> >> >>> > > > >>> or
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > so. We've
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
kind of pushed this off long enough for the
> >> >>> "last little
> >> >>> > > > >>> fix",
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > at this
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
point what's left can come in 3.6 imo
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
~P
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 07:14:18 +0200
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> From: sisve@devhost.se
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> Subject: Re: 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
>
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> I've been using the 3.0.3 packages for
> some
> >> >>> time
> >> >>> > > > without
> >> >>> > > > >>> any
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > problems.
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
>
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> There were some commits to the trunk for
> >> >>> LUCENENET-504
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> <
> >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-504>
> >> >>> > > > >>> and
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > LUCENENET-506
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> <
> >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-506>
> >> >>> > > > >>> which
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > could be
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> applied to the 3.0.3-branch. They both
> affect
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > FastVectorHighlighter,
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> adding support for more query-types. I'm
> not
> >> >>> sure if
> >> >>> > > > they
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > should be
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> applied to the 3.0.3-release since they
> have
> >> >>> had very
> >> >>> > > > >>> little
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > testing, on
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> the other hand, how much more testing
> will the
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > FastVectorHighlighter
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > get
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> for the 3.6-release?
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
>
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> On 2012-09-03 19:10, Prescott Nasser
> wrote:
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> > Alright, I'm back from vacation - are we
> >> >>> happy enough
> >> >>> > > > >>> with
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > the
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
nuget packages? It looks like no other
> >> >>> adjustments were
> >> >>> > > > >>> made to
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > the
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > 3.0.3
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
branch. Should we cut the release
> artifacts? ~P
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
>
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > >
> >> >>> > > > >>> > >
> >> >>> > > > >>>
> >> >>> > > > >>>
> >> >>> > > > >>
> >> >>> > > > >>
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message