lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicholas Paldino <casper...@caspershouse.com>
Subject Re: Long-terms plans for supporting .NET 3.5
Date Fri, 22 Feb 2013 01:58:55 GMT
How much has it changed?  If its significant I'd suggest starting clean and taking advantage
of .net specific features:

Task<T> and async I/O on Directory
Deferred execution with yield return/break with IEnumerable<T>
Better support for generics

The first item is really the big win; scalability can be improved by not having to block threads
on I/O operations.

- Nick

On Feb 21, 2013, at 1:58 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <itamar@code972.com> wrote:

> I've been working with the 4.x Java code base for a while - the API has
> significantly changed from 3.0 so the question is do we start clean or
> replace parts?
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Christopher Currens <
> currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Yes.  I think that's good.  We need to come up with a plan, though, and
>> start distributing work.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com
>>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Nope, lets start dev'ing
>>> 
>>> Lucene 4.2 work in master, 3.x in dedicated branches?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I think we agreed pull requests got a jira ticket with the details and
>>>> then we reviewed it.
>>>> 
>>>> Also lucene 3.6 would support 3.5 still, 4.0 would go 4.0
>>>> 
>>>> Any issues?
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my Windows Phone
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: mherndon michael
>>>> Sent: 2/20/2013 5:26 AM
>>>> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Long-terms plans for supporting .NET 3.5
>>>> 
>>>> Did we ever agree on how to handle pull requests on github?  There are
>> at
>>>> currently least four pull requests on github.
>>>> 
>>>> Also what is the official git repo now for Lucene.Net ?
>>>> 
>>>> Are we moving forward on 4.0 and if so how do we want to proceed with
>>> that?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -M
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
>> itamar@code972.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I suppose all that is left now is to agree on a plan for moving
>>> forward?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Prescott Nasser <
>>> geobmx540@hotmail.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Repo is writable!> From: geobmx540@hotmail.com
>>>>>>> Subject: RE: Long-terms plans for supporting .NET 3.5
>>>>>>> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 09:50:03 -0800
>>>>>>> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hey itamar - I've been emailing private, its read only until
we
>>>> approve
>>>>>> it. Chris and I thought it looked good and I was waiting a bit to
>>> hear
>>>>> from
>>>>>> others.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ill put in to have them flip it to writable today.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sent from my Windows Phone
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Itamar Syn-Hershko
>>>>>>> Sent: 2/17/2013 3:11 AM
>>>>>>> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Long-terms plans for supporting .NET 3.5
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Prescott, any updates on this? I can see they opened a repo for
>> us,
>>>> but
>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> sure whats the status on this?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Prescott Nasser <
>>>>> geobmx540@hotmail.com
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5797. I added
>>> details
>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> the hook email. I'll keep you guy posted. I'm been MIA -
>> closing
>>>> the
>>>>>> yearly
>>>>>>>> books for work, I should be through it in another week and
then
>>>> back
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> track and I'll join the conversation on the road map
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> From: bodewig@apache.org
>>>>>>>>> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Long-terms plans for supporting .NET 3.5
>>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:24:58 +0100
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 2013-01-24, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Troy Howard <
>>>>> thoward37@gmail.com
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The main thing is ensuring that we consider the
ASF git
>> repo
>>>> for
>>>>>>>> Lucene.Net
>>>>>>>>>>> to be the primary source of truth (once we move
over to
>> it)
>>>> Any
>>>>>> PRs
>>>>>>>> on the
>>>>>>>>>>> Github mirror will need to be merged back into
the ASF git
>>>> repo.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> We don't have to work against github. Actually, perhaps
we
>>>> better
>>>>>> work
>>>>>>>>>> against an ASF's git repo and have it auto-mirrored
to
>>> github.
>>>>> The
>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>> git
>>>>>>>>>> works, all you have to do to merge a PR is add the
other
>> repo
>>>> as
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> remote,
>>>>>>>>>> fetch and merge. Github should detect that as closing
the
>> PR
>>> -
>>>>> and
>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>> probably verify that with them.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Sounds great.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Either way, I would recommend setting up a hook to
email
>> this
>>>>> list
>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> notifications about incoming PRs, just so everyone
is
>>> notified.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The rest of Stefan's worries are all covered by good
>>> guidelines
>>>>> on
>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> work with PRs / github tools - voting etc.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Probably yes.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> So, how do we proceed?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Basically we ask the ASF's INFRA team (via JIRA) to create
a
>>>>> writable
>>>>>>>>> git repo for us.  It would probably be best if Prescott
as
>>>> chairman
>>>>>>>>> could drive this.  At one point in time projects moving
to
>> git
>>>> had
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> name a team member who'd be willing to help with the
>> migration.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Stefan
>> 

Mime
View raw message