lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Omri Suissa <omri.sui...@diffdoof.com>
Subject Re: Offer of help vis Lucere project
Date Tue, 02 Oct 2012 12:11:40 GMT
+1 for an ElasticSearch \ Solr port

On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Kieran Logan <kieran@roleconnect.com> wrote:

> For selfish reasons I'd like to see the Azure Directory being improved,
> there has been a few requests on the Q&A
>
> http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsazure/Azure-Library-for-83562538/view/
> Discussions#content for the project to be open sourced
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] [mailto:casperOne@caspershouse.com]
> Sent: 01 October 2012 22:56
> To: <dev@lucenenet.apache.org>
> Cc: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Offer of help vis Lucere project
>
> +1 for an ElasticSearch like service (embed able and REST enabled) would
> get
> my vote.
>
> On Oct 1, 2012, at 5:34 PM, "Prescott Nasser" <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > There is already an Azure directory for Lucene.Net
> (http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsazure/Azure-Library-for-83562538)
> It
> would be fantastic to get that into contrib, but being by a microsoft guy,
> I
> think they stick to MS-LPL. Maybe we could reach out to them for that?
> > The team is large, I think Luke.Net is probably too small for them
> > imo, although it would be nice. ElasticSearch or work on sharpen
> > porting would get my votes
> >> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 22:35:22 +0200
> >> Subject: Re: Offer of help vis Lucere project
> >> From: itamar@code972.com
> >> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> >>
> >> My thoughts exactly - either a search server on top of Lucene.NET
> >> (I'd recommend looking at ElasticSearch as a role-model, not SOLR) ,
> >> a Java porting aid (a handy R# plugin would worth tons more in terms
> >> of productivity than a tool that just translates code, as a dev
> >> should do a pass on the code anyway) , Luke.NET (WPF or Web-ish), or
> >> thinking of an idea to a new missing contrib (Azure directory?)
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Troy Howard <thoward37@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> You may recall a project I started called Lucere before getting
> >>> directly involved with Lucene.Net. At that time I was planning to
> >>> fork Lucene.Net, but since getting involved here that project has
> >>> died off. I still get occasional inquiries about the project via
> >>> Codeproject, and I generally point them to the Lucene.Net mailing
> lists.
> >>>
> >>> I just got an interesting email via that project, with an
> >>> significant offer for development help. See below:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dear Lucere team,
> >>>
> >>> I am writing on behalf 12 students of AGH University of Science and
> >>> Technology in Cracow, Poland. In starting fall semester we have
> >>> project in our objective technologies course. This course is
> >>> concentrated mainly on analysis and design of models (UMLs,
> >>> objective principles and so on), but also on producing very high
> >>> quality of code and using most common approach to development
> >>> nowadays (design patterns, ORMs, unit testing, IoC and so on). We
> >>> are looking for open source project to contribute. We think that we
> >>> could desing and develop one or two specific parts of open project
> >>> like this as a part of our university project. Our team is full of
> >>> very ambitious and very skilled people. Twelve people should be enough
> to build something great. Moreover we have support of our PhDs leading this
> course.
> >>> They will validate all our ideas and will help us to design
> >>> everything in best way.
> >>>
> >>> As I said before we want to create rather entire module than fixing
> >>> some bugs. Due to our course objectives we are interested only in
> >>> highly objective modules. It would be great if you allow us free
> >>> rein in designing such module. Maybe you have in your roadmap some
> >>> features we can build in that way.
> >>>
> >>> Your project seems very interesting for us and we would be delighted
> >>> to contribute. We are waiting eagerly for your response.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Bartlomiej Szczepanik
> >>> Faculty of Computer Science, Electronics and Telecommunication AGH
> >>> Univerity of Science and Technology, Cracow, Poland
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> If this is interesting to us, I will coordinate with Bartlomeij and
> >>> see if we can bring these developers into Lucene.Net. If we do
> >>> suddenly have 12 new developers that want to work on the project...
> >>> What should they do, and how will we coordinate their work?
> >>>
> >>> His stated goals are to create not to bug fix... and porting doesn't
> >>> really fall under the fold of "create and design".
> >>>
> >>> We have always tossed around the idea of creating a layer on top of
> >>> the existing API that would be more .NET idiomatic, or incorporating
> >>> some new .NET specific features into the library *in addition* to
> >>> the baseline functionality that we port directly. Perhaps this could
> >>> be the group to do that work?
> >>>
> >>> We've also talked about trying to get some improvement with an
> >>> automated porting process, and how that would require significant
> >>> coding work to bring a project like Sharpen up to our needs. Perhaps
> >>> they could focus on that?
> >>>
> >>> Maybe they could work on the distributed/federated search
> >>> application that was brought up a while back? a SOLR-like project,
> >>> that is unique to Lucene.Net (as opposed to porting SOLR or just
> >>> bringing back the .NET remoteing model that was removed)?
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps they could design a new tool like Luke, that is more
> >>> maintainable (have you seen that code? eek)...
> >>>
> >>> There are a lot of options here. Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Troy
> >
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message