lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Granroth, Neal V." <neal.granr...@thermofisher.com>
Subject RE: [Vote] Apache Lucene.Net 3.0.3 (Take 2)
Date Mon, 01 Oct 2012 16:11:52 GMT
As I always build Lucene.NET from the source in SVN, I'm not the best person to answer that
question; the community should decide.  I just surprised by the post referring people to a
link to one of your personal folders which seems a bit dubious for official distributions.
 Shouldn't binary distributions of RC builds be placed in the same place as the final release
will go?

- Neal

-----Original Message-----
From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx540@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM
To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
Subject: RE: [Vote] Apache Lucene.Net 3.0.3 (Take 2)

Where should they be placed? In the Incubator that's how we always cut a release until it
was approved, then files were uploaded to dist. I'm happy to get them in the appropriate location.

> From: neal.granroth@thermofisher.com
> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 07:56:45 -0700
> Subject: RE: [Vote] Apache Lucene.Net 3.0.3 (Take 2)
> 
> These files should not be used as representative of the 3.0.3 RC
> While I believe you have a good intent; as these files are simply within a personal folder
there's no official control, they cannot and should not be trusted for any use.
> 
> - Neal G.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:geobmx540@hotmail.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2012 6:20 PM
> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [Vote] Apache Lucene.Net 3.0.3 (Take 2)
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~pnasser/Lucene.Net/3.0.3-RC1/
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> > From: geobmx540@hotmail.com
> > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> > Subject: [Vote] Apache Lucene.Net 3.0.3 (Take 2)
> > Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 16:18:53 -0700
> >
> > Alright, made updates to the binary releases to include the .pdb as well as missing
Spatial.NTS binaries. I didn't change anything about the source files, which is why I didn't
upgrade the number to RC2.
> >
> > Again if you don't mind:
> >
> > +1 go go go
> > 0 eh..
> > -1 still have a few issues.
> >
> > Please review the source and binaries to make sure we're not missing anything -
doing this with a half year in between doesn't make me super confident I've got it 100% right.
> >
> > ~P 		 	   		  
 		 	   		  

Mime
View raw message