lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doron Cohen <DOR...@il.ibm.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] release Lucene 2.1
Date Sat, 17 Feb 2007 02:43:06 GMT
+1.

(also since releases are going to be more frequent.)

Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org> wrote on 15/02/2007 08:49:33:

> +1.  Out the door is good, esp. since there haven't been complaints
> about it in the past.
>
> Thanks for doing this Yonik!
>
>
> On Feb 15, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>
> > Recap:
> > - some contrib modules can't be built without the user downloading
> > more jars themselves
> > - the "demo" in the binary package currently needs to be built by the
> > user, and needs a special build.xml that doesn't rely on lucene source
> > code (oops).  I just verified that this was also broken in the 2.0.0
> > release.
> >
> > My opinion:
> > - things aren't worse than in past releases
> > - people can always use the binary release to get pre-built jars
> > - people can always get the source for any version out of our
> > subversion repository
> > - most people's use of the source jar is not to build Lucene, but to
> > study the source and/or point their IDE at it.
> > - not all contrib modules are equal... some like highlighting and
> > stemmers are often used, while others like gdata shouldn't even be
> > rev'd at the same time as lucene.
> >
> > So, given that these aren't code quality issues, I think the biggest
> > benefit to users would be to get this out the door as is, and work on
> > the output of "ant dist src-dist" going forward to tighten things up.
> >
> > -Yonik


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message