lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rory Plaire <>
Subject Re: [Lucene.Net] Lucene.Net 3 onwards and 2.9.4g
Date Fri, 30 Dec 2011 04:12:06 GMT
To make it clear - I want a .Net idiomatic API as the only API. I've got
experience with both kinds of APIs - strict transliterated from Java and
translated from Java to .Net. For me, the choice is pretty clear - the
latter has the advantage when it comes to long-term maintenance and support
from .Net developers.

Is working on the transliterated API (meaning the line-by-line copy) a
pleasant experience for anyone with .Net competency? The largest Java-.Net
project I've worked on to learn the API for and then contribute to is
NHibernate. The API there is fairly natural since it relies on .Net idioms
- naming, type arrangements, generic collections, and base type
expectations. It's easy to use the tools I'm familiar with to navigate.
Things are like I might expect them to be without imposing a cognative
burden. Lucene is not like this. I have to struggle to think about the API
- it's not a huge struggle, but reading code is hard and the burden is
taxing since the library is large. This is an important matter since the
community we want to encourage is comprised of developers who think a lot
like other .Net developers. I'm not sure its useful to diverge these the
two perspectives of developer and community builder too far or in isolation.
I've been watching and experimenting with Lucene and then Lucene.Net for
years. I've attempted to use Lucene.Net on a number of projects but it's
been dropped for various reasons, but one of them was consistently the API
is strange from a .Net developer perspective. I've attempted to contribute
to it in the past as well, but it was hard since the natural flow of coding
in C# is broken up. When I heard that Lucene.Net was close to going into
the Attic and that I finally managed to use it in an economically
beneficial way on a project, I resolved to contribute to it. I want this
contribution to be enjoyable as well as valuable, otherwise I know I'll
just stop contributing after a short while because it's not meeting both my
developer needs (fun and useful). It won't be conscious, but it will
happen. We see this sort of thing on OSS projects frequently for various
reasons, but if the coding is an enjoyable experience for .Net developers I
imagine it will be easier to keep and recruit new community members over a
long project life.


On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Prescott Nasser <>wrote:

> Someone has to take a stand and call out what they prefer -

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