lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Itamar Syn-Hershko <ita...@code972.com>
Subject Re: 3.0.3
Date Thu, 20 Sep 2012 03:50:24 GMT
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