lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL]
Date Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:17:10 GMT

On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:43 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
> Sounds ok to me.  There is no mention of Nutch, though.  If Nutch is
> going through Incubator with its own proposal, maybe we need to say
> that.
> Let's give time developers in other time zones to add themselves to the
> list.

Sam Ruby recommended that we not emphasize making an 
umbrella project:

Sam Ruby had the following advice:

>> The board has a bias against self-referential definitions (the 'foo' 
>> project is for managing software related to the 'foo' project - 
>> believe it or not, this happens all too often).  So naming the 
>> proposed project something like search is a good idea.
>> The board tends to prefer projects whose scopes don't overlap with 
>> other projects.  That does not appear to be a problem here.  In other 
>> cases, this involves highlighting differences in technical approaches 
>> taken by two "competing" projects.
>> Finally, some members of the board have a strong bias against 
>> umbrella projects.  My advice here is to not emphasize this aspect of 
>> the proposal.  Overall, the fact that this reduces the size of the 
>> Jakarta project umbrella, those with this bias will be happy.

While I'm confident that Nutch will be accepted for incubation and then 
migrate out of incubation, this is not a done deal.  We have a 
compelling reason to bring Lucene to TLP without Nutch.  Nutch has a 
compelling reason to incubate without worrying about its future home 
(which theoretically could be under Jakarta or Lucene (though of course is where its aimed).


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message