lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prescott Nasser <>
Subject RE: Windows RT / WP8 Version
Date Thu, 22 Aug 2013 07:32:20 GMT
Agreed - it would be nice to see us get out a stable 4.x release then worry about dog other
cool stuff - don't want ot get ahead of ourselves (but I don't want to dampen enthusiasm either)

Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Michael Mitiaguin<>
Sent: ‎8/‎21/‎2013 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: Windows RT / WP8 Version

Just wondering , there seems to be a problem to keep up with Java
counterpart for full  .NET framework , plus what versions of .NET to
support in this conventional port in a future.
Is it realistic to support all these platforms with Lucene XYZ versions,
or it is a discussion for the sake of discussion ? Unless certain group
really needs to deliver something on other platform using Lucene and
provides the code very unlikely any progress will be made.

On 8/21/2013 3:49 PM, Christopher Currens wrote:
> Hey guys,
> I've been thinking lately of doing a real push to have Lucene.Net support
> more platforms, specifically Windows RT and Windows Phone 8.  There are two
> ways I can think of doing it, and each has its own specific advantages and
> disadvantages.
> One way, would be to utilize the Portable Class Libraries in VS 2012, and
> target .NET Framework and Windows Phone (this would also give us
> Silverlight).  We could leave the core pieces of Lucene.Net in that
> library, and then have platform specific libraries that will share the
> code.  This has a convenience advantage at the cost of fragmenting our code
> base a little bit, since some parts will be spread across different
> assemblies.  We'd probably need to make a platform abstraction layer which
> might involve changing some core types to have abstract base classes that
> could be implemented by each platform assembly.
> Another way, would be to manage it ourselves using different projects.  The
> source code could stay in it's existing place, and we'd add links to each
> source file in the project (instead of having it copy to each directory).
>   Then, each edit we make to a file would work against all of the projects
> that link that file at the same time.  For platforms that don't support
> certain features (one current example is ParallelSearcher only working on
> 4.0+ and not 3.5), they just don't link that file.  However, we still have
> to make sure that the files we do link are cross-platform.
> I actually don't know which one I prefer, I either need to give it more
> thought or just choose one, see if I hate it, and switch.  The problem with
> the Portable Class Library projects is that they aren't supported in
> express editions of Visual Studio.
> Comments?
> Thanks,
> Christopher

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