Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 57295 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2007 20:47:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Feb 2007 20:47:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 76671 invoked by uid 500); 8 Feb 2007 20:47:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 76619 invoked by uid 500); 8 Feb 2007 20:47:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 76607 invoked by uid 99); 8 Feb 2007 20:47:57 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:47:57 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [66.111.4.29] (HELO out5.smtp.messagingengine.com) (66.111.4.29) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:47:46 -0800 Received: from out1.internal (unknown [10.202.2.149]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A65ADA32 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 15:47:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by out1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:47:25 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: E8YeqRo7XIApS7/NoYz8Y/ssmV56SNHz68/R9CSIZZf7 1170967644 Received: from [10.17.4.90] (pool-71-162-112-210.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [71.162.112.210]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFC79142BE for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 15:47:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <45CB8C56.2000701@mikemccandless.com> Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:47:18 -0500 From: Michael McCandless User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: NewIndexModifier - - - DeletingIndexWriter References: <204416.59450.qm@web50310.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Chris Hostetter wrote: > : It's a temporary name, no? In the end we probably want to keep the > : _name_ IndexWriter, so why not just it IndexWriter2 and when we are > : happy with it, we make it be the new IndexWriter and we deprecate IW2. > > Um... actually that's a really good point, this is first and formost an > extension of IndexWriter ... is there any reason not to rename > "NewIndexModifier" as "IndexWriter" (refactoring the existing IndexWriter > code into it, or moving the renaming the current IndexWriter to > "OldIndexWriter", or "NonDeletingIndexWriter") > > the only reason i can think of not to do this would be if we are worried > about people who currently subclass IndexWriter getting a change in > behavior if we change the INdexWRiter out from under them ... is this a > signifcant concern? NewIndexModifier doesn't seem to change any of hte > semantics of the IndexWriter methods it extends. +1 I think the new methods in NewIndexModifier are low-risk to the existing IndexWriter, so, we should just add them into IndexWriter and not create a new class? Then we don't have a naming problem anymore :) Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org