lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Currens <currens.ch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 3.6
Date Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:43:26 GMT
Oh wait.  Nevermind...it looks like I did, at least in the 3.0.3
branch.  Hmm, we actually have quite a few changes that are present
only in 3.0.3, that should probably be merged into trunk.  Should we
merge all changes in now or after we release?  Either way, I strongly
dislike merging in SVN...ugh

What was that you were saying about git, Itamar? :)

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Christopher Currens
<currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> Prescott,
>
> We had decided to update the scripts/version information for 3.0.3 a
> while back, and I just realized I did all of the work and never
> committed it.  Yikes.  I thought I did, but I must have been
> distracted when I was doing it, and never actually completed it.
> We're still waiting on the Spatial stuff right, so I can get this in
> before release?  I don't think it will affect the build/packaging
> steps.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com> wrote:
>> This is why they invented git :)
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/compare/5261b571...e4402c22c
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Christopher Currens <
>> currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not much of an SVN guy myself, so what I wound up doing was pulling
>>> down the two branches and used windiff on the actual directories.  I could
>>> quickly see which files were added, removed, changed, or untouched.  I
>>> guess you could do the same things with SVN probably, but I don't know how
>>> or if it is a painless process or not.
>>>
>>> The biggest thing would be having multiple people working on and dividing
>>> up the work.  A lot of times, you have classes that span namespaces, so I
>>> guess you'd have to have a policy where you'd stick to a namespace and if
>>> you require something that someone else is porting, just stub it out for
>>> later.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com
>>> >wrote:
>>>
>>> > What was your strategy for upgrading? Just getting a list of all the svn
>>> > changes between 3.0.3 tag and 3.6? I'm terrible with SVN, but is there an
>>> > easy way to compare the tags? (I feel like there must be)
>>> >
>>> > > Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 13:02:33 -0700
>>> > > Subject: Re: 3.6
>>> > > From: currens.chris@gmail.com
>>> > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
>>> > >
>>> > > I used 2.9.4 as a base.  Some files were so bad, though, that I ported
>>> > them
>>> > > from scratch.
>>> > >
>>> > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Prescott Nasser <
>>> geobmx540@hotmail.com
>>> > >wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > As 3.0.3 is more or less ready to release, I want to talk quickly
>>> about
>>> > > > 3.6. For 3.0.3 Chris did a herculean job creating the initial
code
>>> > base -
>>> > > > Chris, did you take the java code and port it all? or did you
use
>>> 2.9.4
>>> > > > and update the code base?
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>

Mime
View raw message