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: Long-terms plans for supporting .NET 3.5
Date Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:42:17 GMT
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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message