lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
Date Wed, 08 Aug 2012 21:23:04 GMT
I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date. Anything in trunk should
be there

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Christopher Currens
Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues

Thanks for the feedback.  Let us know if you run into any more
issues/concerns.


Thanks,
Christopher

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
neal.granroth@thermofisher.com> wrote:

> Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the current
> work-in-progress.
>
> Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications.  Especially for those
> that rely upon the binary packages.
>
> - Neal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Currens [mailto:currens.chris@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
> directory/solution files.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> currens.chris@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > See inline comments.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > neal.granroth@thermofisher.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> in
> >> the VS2010 folder.
> >>
> >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk?  Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> very
> > out of date.
> >
> >
> >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> >> was created with a newer version.
> >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> >>
> >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away.  I
> > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> > in.  In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> to
> > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> (or
> > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010.  On my laptop,
> > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> >
> >
> >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> >>
> >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> >
> >
> >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> they
> >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> >>
> >
> > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > worry about this.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> - Neal G.
> >>
> >>
> >
>

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