lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prescott Nasser <>
Subject RE: and 4.8
Date Thu, 17 Nov 2016 01:48:27 GMT
I own the packages and I think Simon shares that access, will look up what you need tonight
to push to it

Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Shad Storhaug<>
Sent: ‎11/‎12/‎2016 4:55 AM
To:<>; Connie Yau<>
Cc: Prescott Nasser<>;<>
Subject: RE: and 4.8

> Do we have a sense of how many folks are using it?

Not a lot - you can get a rough idea about how many by the number of downloads of the package:

On the other hand, on NuGet we are getting an average of 614 downloads per day, so we can
expect the number to grow quite a bit from where it is when we get the pre-release up there.
Based on other pre-releases I have dealt with, I would guess that will put the number of downloads
around 30-50 per day, but it could be higher depending on how much buzz there is around Lucene.Net
and how many people seek out the new feature set.

But in any case it certainly makes more sense to break any versioning scheme now before we
get on NuGet than after. It might help to setup a test MyGet feed and play with some fake
NuGet packages (they are just Zip files with a different extension and a pre-defined folder
structure) and Visual Studio with the current versioning scheme to determine if upgrading
will work correctly as-is. It seems like it should work as-is, but it would be nice to have


> Regarding Nuget pushes -- do we have the credentials to the account that "owns" the package?

It may not be necessary to have the credentials. What is necessary is for MyGet to be setup
with an API key (which someone with credentials will need to obtain). If MyGet already has
an API key, you can simply push the package upstream to NuGet via the MyGet control panel
once it is ready.


If you are following along with the exchange between Connie Yau and me, there is some new
information that she has provided that helps with this effort.

First of all, it looks like for the time being we are stuck with MSBuild. This most likely
means that we need to have a build script in order to support the multi-targeting of .NET
4.5.1 and .NET Core and to package both into the same NuGet package.

It sounds like we will need to have separate binaries for 32 bit and 64 bit for the Lucene.Net.Analysis.Common
package (correct me if I am wrong Connie). While NuGet does have multi-targeting support built-in
for different .NET frameworks, it apparently doesn't have support built-in for different bitness: What that most likely means is that we need to either
split into separate 32 and 64 bit NuGet packages (yuck) or create a scripted alternative to
check which bitness the target project is targeting and install the correct binary. There
is an example of such an approach here:

Whatever bitness solution we come up with for Lucene.Net.Analysis.Common will apply to Lucene.Net.Highlighter
and Lucene.Net.Analysis.ICU as well.

The most sensible thing to do at this point is to wait for a response from Connie to determine
such things as:

1. Do we need to wait for #191 to be merged before starting on this?
2. How much time will it take for that to happen?
3. What, if any, scripts will need to be made for building, for NuGet packaging, and for NuGet
package installation?
4. Can we take advantage of the new project.json functionality (
to specify what is in the NuGet packages, should we use the older XML .nuspec format, or some
other method?
5. Which of the scripts will be prepared by Connie and her team, and which will need to be
prepared by Wyatt, Presscott, or me?
6. Is switching to xUnit still the plan or are we sticking with NUnit?
7. If making scripts, what scripting tool(s) should be used?

For the build scripts we should only be using cross-platform tools going forward.

One option is Gulp, a node.js extension which has the (cool) capability of running multiple
things in parallel, which means we could run both builds in parallel, test them both in parallel,
and run all of the NuGet pack commands in parallel.

It looks like PowerShell is now also cross-platform:,
so that is also an option. In the past, I have used it in conjunction with PSake for builds: Connie is also using PowerShell scripts, so that makes at
least 2 of us that are familiar with this.

Wyatt mentioned he likes FAKE, care to elaborate on its feature set?

Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888)

-----Original Message-----
From: Wyatt Barnett []
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 12:34 AM
Cc: Prescott Nasser
Subject: Re: and 4.8

Patch numbers will incriment the way the setup is laid out. We will need to shift to the myget
stuff to prerelease and that might cause some pain. Do we have a sense of how many folks are
using it?

Regarding Nuget pushes -- do we have the credentials to the account that "owns" the package?
I wasn't involved in pushing it last time so I'm not sure how it got there.

I'll take a stab at fixing the package naming stuff over the weekend.

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 3:51 PM Itamar Syn-Hershko <>

> >> Thanks for all the hard work getting the code ready enough to have
> >> this
> discussion.
> 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
> <>
> wrote:
> > 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
> >
> > 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