lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Itamar Syn-Hershko <>
Subject Re: 4,.8 work
Date Sat, 05 Dec 2015 23:05:05 GMT
Hey, that's great news!

We are still in exactly the same place. A few failing tests in core, and
the analysis sub-project is the biggest blocker at this point from
releasing a beta version.

I'm still around. I will happily look at PRs and provide ideas - I did
quite a bit of work in that area and may have some unpushed work locally. I
will check in a couple of days. I will be able to join active development
in a couple of weeks though.

I like your idea for divide and conquer. You will find that the code in
that project is actually many small independent parts, with some central
pieces that are less trivial to port but need to be done right.

JFYI, several teams in Microsoft (nuget and Orchard to name two) are
looking to use the new bits once we have something ready. I spoke to them
while I was at the MVP summit and they are interested in testing, helping
and looking at porting to CoreCLR once we've released. So it's great to see
you got some time in your hands again :)



Itamar Syn-Hershko | @synhershko <>
Freelance Developer & Consultant
Lucene.NET committer and PMC member

On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Laimonas Simutis <> wrote:

> Hello group,
> I am starting to get more time back and can contribute to Lucene.Net 4.8
> migration again.
> Last I left off it sounded like the next big task was to get Analysis
> library ported over. I took a look at the Analysis code and I see that it
> is not fully converted to the point of compilation. And there are quite a
> few gray areas with Java constructs (SAX XML parsing, Collator usage) that
> might not have .NET equivalents. Is anyone still around to bounce some
> ideas and do PR reviews? Itamar, are you still around?
> I converted Analysis unit tests and will be starting from that end: include
> unit test classes one by one while including corresponding Analysis classes
> required to run the tests, get the test working and then move on to the
> next test suite. Itamar, let me know what you think about that approach. I
> will get going and see where this gets me.
> Laimis

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