lucene-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject svn commit: r935039 - /lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt
Date Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:41:38 GMT
Author: gsingers
Date: Fri Apr 16 18:41:38 2010
New Revision: 935039

check in of report


Modified: lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt
--- lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt (original)
+++ lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt Fri Apr 16 18:41:38 2010
@@ -41,9 +41,7 @@ In this regard, we don't feel that there
 concern regarding the umbrella nature of the project.  To quote Greg:
 "we're all good. no changes are necessary."  
-Based on various discussions in the community (and in some cases spurred
+However, based on various discussions in the community (and in some cases spurred
 on by the Board's concerns), the Lucene PMC is pursuing some changes
 moving forward. 
@@ -54,20 +52,20 @@ Solr and Lucene such that there is now a
 already very high overlap of code and committers) and dev mailing list
 across those two projects.  We intend to still release both Lucene and
 Solr artifacts and to keep separate user question mailing lists for the
-foreseeable future.  
+foreseeable future.  Finally, we have put up a resolution for Nutch
+to be a TLP.  While it is search related, it also has a significant
+component related to crawling.  Nutch also has a solid, independent
+community from Lucene, including a diverse set of committers.
-This leaves the following sub projects: Nutch, the Ports and Open
+This leaves the following sub projects:the Ports and Open
-At this point, we are discussing whether Nutch should be spun out.  It's
-focus is increasingly on crawling alone and thus will likely warrant
-becoming a TLP at some point in the future, but the sense is that it is
-not ready to happen just yet.  As for the Ports, these fill a niche within
+In regards to the Ports, these fill a niche within
 the Lucene community and are generally small, have almost complete
 technical overlap (releases usually follow shortly after Lucene Java
 releases) but not necessarily a lot of committer overlap due to them being
 ports to other programming languages. Because they are nearly automated
-ports, there isn't also a lot of contributions to them, but there are
+ports, there isn't a lot of contributions to them, but there are
 decent sized communities of users for each port. Branding wise, they make
 sense being a part of the Lucene TLP.  Thus, the PMC doesn't feel a need
 to spin these out, even though they don't share SVN, etc. with Lucene

View raw message