lucene-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From hoss...@apache.org
Subject svn commit: r935063 - /lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt
Date Fri, 16 Apr 2010 20:02:46 GMT
Author: hossman
Date: Fri Apr 16 20:02:46 2010
New Revision: 935063

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=935063&view=rev
Log:
reformat to normalize line lengths, no content changes

Modified:
    lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt

Modified: lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt?rev=935063&r1=935062&r2=935063&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt (original)
+++ lucene/board-reports/2010/board-report-april-special.txt Fri Apr 16 20:02:46 2010
@@ -30,7 +30,6 @@ The answers to these questions, in short
       unless they have explicitly been made a committer of 
       that sub-project by a vote of the PMC. 
     (end quotage) 
-     
 2) As a whole: Yes.  Some PMC members are not directly involved in some
    sub-projects, but every sub-project has multiple voices on the PMC. 
 3) We believe so, but if the board feels like more details about the state
@@ -41,9 +40,9 @@ 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."  
   
-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. 
+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.
 
 The PMC has put up two resolutions for this Board meeting to spin out
 Mahout and Tika, both of which have solid communities that are independent
@@ -52,24 +51,23 @@ 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.  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:the Ports and Open
-Relevance. 
-
-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 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
-core.  That being said, we are still evaluating the situation.
+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: the Ports and Open Relevance. 
+
+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 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 core.  That being said, we are still
+evaluating the situation.
 
 The Open Relevance sub project is small community effort to facilitate
 discussions on relevance in Lucene.  It is nice to have it's own branding,



Mime
View raw message