lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From mherndon michael <mhern...@michaelherndon.com>
Subject Re: Long-terms plans for supporting .NET 3.5
Date Fri, 22 Feb 2013 13:54:19 GMT
There were requests to support windows mobile phone, Win RT, etc.  Also
whatever test suite we use and whatever tests we write need to work/execute
on Mono

Most likely that will cause friction with a straight port as we'll need to
work around limitations if we fulfill those requests. On the flip side, it
would be expand Lucene.Net into niche arenas.

 -Michael

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>wrote:

> Tremendously. The Codecs API is the biggest change, and there are many
> more, including namespace changes.
>
> I gave it some thought and I believe nuking master and starting fresh is
> the best way to go. First step would be to actually do a line-by-line port
> except for getters/setters and data structures, and then we can specialize
> classes to use more advanced .NET features. I believe a custom Directory
> implementation should be created in its own class, not instead of the
> line-by-line port.
>
> Starting fresh would help in refactoring bits of code as we do, and is much
> quicker than comparing diffs when there's a lot of changes to account for.
> We can copy-paste or reuse code from 3.0 when handling code that we know
> hasn't changed too much.
>
> I'd also push for revamping the test suite - making it use xunit and using
> helper methods so we can copy-paste tests from Java and minimize the amount
> of changes required. We don't really care about code quality there, we just
> need the tests to pass.
>
> After having a fully working port, we can dive in and replace inner parts
> with .NET specific implementations, like better async support all around.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 3:58 AM, Nicholas Paldino <
> casperOne@caspershouse.com> wrote:
>
> > 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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message