lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chuck Williams <>
Subject Re: Results (Re: Survey: Lucene and Java 1.4 vs. 1.5)
Date Sat, 17 Jun 2006 04:52:30 GMT
The main arguments have never been about coding simplicity.  I think the
arguments presented thus far boil down to this:

   1. (Pro 1.5) All the committers, and to a lesser extent the patch
      contributors, whose use 1.5 regularly in their standard
      environments and will make more contributions to Lucene if their
      contributions are natural in this environment and are/or are
      by-products of other work they are doing.
   2. (Con 1.5) All the Lucene community members who cannot yet move to
      1.5 for whatever reason.

I'm in camp 1, but respect the people in camp 2.  At some point Lucene
moves to 1.5.  The question is where is the tipping point?  That's why I
think the pmc/committers just have to make a decision and the rest of us
live with it.


Robert Engels wrote on 06/16/2006 06:15 PM:
> I think you should port Lucene to MS-DOS...
> If your app can't move beyond MS-DOS, then you stick with version 1.9 (or
> 2.0 in this case).
> If you can't innovate and move forward, you die.
> Java has a GREAT history of supporting prior versions. At some point though
> you need to be able to move forward since developers may not be trained in
> the "legacy" environment.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: markharw00d [] 
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 6:34 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Results (Re: Survey: Lucene and Java 1.4 vs. 1.5)
>  >1.5 IS the Java version that the majority Lucene users use, not 1.4!
>  >Does this mean we can now start accepting 1.5 code?
> This isn't simply about which JVM gets used the most wins.
> This is about "how many Lucene users will we inconvenience or lose by moving
> to 1.5?"
> Right now the survey sample tells me roughly a third which doesn't seem like
> a good thing. Maybe the question is more usefully "who can't/won't move to
> 1.5 in the immediate future?"
> I believe we shouldn't select the minimum platform based on the coding
> convenience it may offer us which seems to be the major objective behind
> 1.5 adoption. When developing a library deployed in many
> applications/environments over which you have no control and where careful
> consideration of runtime performance not coding convenience/speed of
> development is the primary concern my preference would be to choose 1.4.
> Not all deployment environments can be upgraded easily. Take my current
> application at work. It's applet-based and rolled out to hundreds of
> corporate desktops which are stuck on 1.4 (this won't change anytime soon).
> Lucene isn't on the client but all client and server code in the app has
> been written in 1.4 to avoid any issues of any 1.5 code leaking onto the 1.4
> client. All of the many 3rd party libraries in use (Spring, database drivers
> etc) are 1.4 compatible in their latest versions. I'd like to stick with the
> latest Lucene codebase but mandating 1.5 for Lucene would introduce a code
> management headache to this app with the mixed JVMs
> Unless there are *really* good runtime benefits that are solely based on
> 1.5 libraries or source code I would prefer to see Lucene stick with 1.4 as
> a base rather than limit Lucene's deployment options simply because of
> code-time benefits the new 1.5 syntax offers.
> I see that the Spring framework recognise this dilemma and still seek to
> support as far back as 1.3 (see
> Simon said "everyone should download 1.5". It's nice to think you can
> accelerate the global adoption of 1.5 by changing projects like Lucene but
> the reality is corporates do not change platforms overnight because of such
> a change.
> That's a long-winded way of saying "-1" unless I hear of any arguments which
> are based on something much more substantial than "1.5 makes coding easier".
> Cheers,
> Mark
> ___________________________________________________________
> The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from
> your Internet provider.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

*Chuck Williams*
V: (808)885-8688
C: (415)846-9018 <>
Skype: manawiz
AIM: hawimanawiz
Yahoo: jcwxx

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

View raw message