lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: 3.0.3
Date Sun, 23 Sep 2012 19:06:19 GMT
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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message