lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Itamar Syn-Hershko <>
Subject Re: and 4.8
Date Thu, 10 Nov 2016 20:51:20 GMT
>> Thanks for all the hard work getting the code ready enough to have this

Indeed! happy times!

I say we keep the nightly builds published on myget. We can promote
packages from myget to nuget with a click of a button. We can do this now
to have the latest bits out there on myget as a prerelease, and then the
next time we do this we make sure that patch number was incremented.

Before we do that however, we need to update the author / owner name of all
packages and add a description, see how they look at



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

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Wyatt Barnett <>

> Good questions, here are my thoughts on some answers:
> I concur getting out on nuget probably makes sense at this point.
> Good point on version numbering. The way we are wired right now everything
> descends from a specific source control build so, if release does not
> involve any source control changes, it could be the same build number. So
> and would be identical builds for us.
> It looks like the metadata is coming out of the AssemblyInfo.cs files in
> each project, we should be able to flesh that out a bit there.
> The way we push to myget is based on a nightly build -- whenever master is
> updated it will pick up the changes, run all the tests and push the
> artifacts to nuget. We could just repoint this at nuget if we wanted. For
> non-beta releases I think that nuget pushes should certainly be a manual
> step.
> Currently all of the builds happen in our teamcity server at
> LuceneNet&tab=projectOverview
> <>. We don't have much of a build script
> going on outside of that, but that is very scripted and repeatable.
> Thanks for all the hard work getting the code ready enough to have this
> discussion.
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 4:37 PM Shad Storhaug <>
> wrote:
> My vote is yes.
> 1. If we had a pre-release presence on NuGet, more people might be
> interested in helping out (or at least providing feedback).
> 2. I have an open source project that depends on Lucene.Net, and it would
> be easier to deal with for me (and I am sure other projects that depend on
> Lucene.Net) if the pre-release were available on NuGet instead of having to
> instruct everyone how to setup their IDE/CI build to access MyGet.
> I am not sure if we have the versioning setup the right way:
> incremented-nuget-package-versions
> I don't think there is a way to make a pre-release (that acts like a
> pre-release) when we have a 4 segment version number. Has this versioning
> scheme been fully tested when transitioning from pre-release to release?
> And also does it work when upgrading from Lucene.Net 3.0.3 to the 4 segment
> pre-release? I suppose using 4 segments will work if we increment the
> revision number when making this transition, but it would be difficult to
> correlate a pre-release to a specific release (at least for a .NET release
> - but if the intent was only to correlate it with Java Lucene versions
> while allowing for bug fixes I think we have done it).
> It looks as though several of the more recently ported packages (such as
> Lucene.Net.Join, Lucene.Net.Suggest, Lucene.Net.Misc, Lucene.Net.Memory,
> Lucene.Net.QueryParser) are not currently part of the build:
> Also, the packages that exist seem to be missing the metadata (such as
> descriptions).
> Is there some reason why we don't have a build script checked into the
> repository to manage these details?
> It also might pay off to wait until I push my local branch. I have fixed
> the majority of the remaining bugs in Lucene.Net.Core already, so it would
> be best to post the latest and greatest on NuGet rather than yesterday's
> build. I was doing a bit more debugging, but let me change gears for the
> moment and work on getting this to a stable point to push to master.
> We certainly wouldn't want every CI build up on NuGet, though. We need to
> be able to manually push at certain stable points.  What is the plan?
> Thanks,
> Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prescott Nasser []
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 1:03 PM
> To:
> Subject: and 4.8
> Do we want to have the packages pushed to nugget as pre-release?

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