lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arne Claassen <>
Subject Re: Lucene.NET Community Status
Date Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:29:28 GMT

I've been a user of for years and would find its loss a  
great setback to the community. I've spelunked through the code base a  
bit here and there to track down issues, but have not been comfortable  
enough to contribute. As a user i've been very happy with  
to the point that I have not been monitoring its progress and had been  
unaware that the situation was this bad.

If one of the present comitters can point me to some guidance on what  
is the best way I can start contributing and what the apache process  
is. I can tackle bugs and ensure works well on mono. We're  
currently using 2.4.2 since last time i tried 2.9.1 (back in May) it  
had issues with mono, so i guess fixing whatever caused that problem  
(if it still exists) would be a good introduction to contributing.

If we can't get the required traction going by the end of the year I'd  
much rather see Lucene.NET go back into Incubation than to see it  
fork. I feel that diverging from the lucene brand cannot do anything  
but hurt the project further

Arne Claassen

San Diego, CA

On Oct 30, 2010, at 3:34 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:

> Thanks, Aaron.
> By the way, to all others reading this: please do not reply to me  
> privately.  It does nothing to help the community and in fact just  
> reinforces in my mind that the project is not sustainable at the ASF  
> because people aren't willing to publicly support it.
> -Grant
> On Oct 29, 2010, at 8:07 PM, Aaron Powell wrote:
>> I'm sure I'm not the only one who would be really disappointed to  
>> loose
>> Lucene.Net from the .Net communities toolbox.
>> I'd be happy to offer up my services to keep the project alive.  
>> I'll admit I
>> don't know much about the way projects are run under the Apache  
>> umbrella,
>> but I'm keen to ensure that Lucene.Net doesn't die :).
>> Aaron Powell
>> Umbraco Ninja
>> | | Skype:
>> aaron.l.powell | MSN:
>> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Grant Ingersoll  
>> <>wrote:
>>> FYI: This message was sent to the lucene-net-dev@lucene.a.o list  
>>> on Oct.
>>> 25 and elicited zero replies.  I am sending it here in the hopes  
>>> that some
>>> of you will step forward and either bring this project back to  
>>> life via
>>> going back to the Incubator or we put it in the Apache Attic and  
>>> someone can
>>> take and maintain it somewhere else under a different name per the  
>>> terms of
>>> the Apache License.
>>> ---
>>> Hi .Netters,
>>> The Lucene PMC would like to ask everyone involved with .NET if  
>>> they might
>>> chime in on the status of this project.  There hasn't been a  
>>> commit since
>>> July 2010 (and that one was trivial and there were only 2 in June)  
>>> and there
>>> seems to be very little activity on the dev mailing list.  There  
>>> also has
>>> not been a release in a long time.  This was brought up at the  
>>> last Lucene
>>> Board Report and it doesn't appear that there has been any action  
>>> since.   A
>>> community should be able to withstand the loss of a single  
>>> committer, but
>>> here it appears that there are no longer any committers willing to  
>>> work on
>>> the project.
>>> In order to remedy the situation, we would like the following  
>>> things to be
>>> done:
>>> 1.  The community needs to show some (sustained) life.  Not just  
>>> in code,
>>> but in discussion of the project's future, etc.  We would expect the
>>> committers to take a leadership role here.
>>> 2. The community needs to do a real release that is voted on by  
>>> the PMC.
>>> 3. The webpage needs to be updated to reflect that those previous  
>>> "source"
>>> releases are not real releases and should be taken down.   
>>> Likewise, the news
>>> section should not tout these non-releases as releases.  The  
>>> website should
>>> also meet the PMC Branding guidelines recently sent out.
>>> 4. Identify some new blood for contributors/committers.  Or the  
>>> current
>>> committers need to step up more and take a lead role in the  
>>> community.
>>> We would like to see action on all of these things by the end of  
>>> this year.
>>> If they can't be met, there will be one of the following actions:
>>> 1. Go back into Incubation
>>> 2. Go into the Apache Attic.  If someone wants to take the code  
>>> base and
>>> fork it out as a project somewhere else under a new name that does  
>>> not use
>>> the Lucene trademark name (since that is owned by the ASF) than  
>>> that is
>>> perfectly acceptable under the Apache license.
>>> If the conditions can be met, we think that the project should  
>>> spin itself
>>> out as its own Top Level ASF project with its own PMC so that its  
>>> future
>>> direction can be set by the stakeholders of the project and not by  
>>> the
>>> larger Lucene project as a whole.
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Grant Ingersoll
>>> On behalf of the Lucene PMC
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll

View raw message