lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <>
Subject [VOTE] Break Back Compatibility "Contract" on Fieldable
Date Wed, 30 Jul 2008 12:44:00 GMT
As they say, rules are meant to be broken...

For a variety of reasons, some outlined below, I (and others) would  
like us to break our back compatibility requirements and allow for  
modifying the Fieldable interface in 2.x releases with the 3.x plan to  
be to separate out write side interfaces from read side interfaces per  
Hoss' suggestion in


Our reasons are based on LUCENE-1340, LUCENE-1219 and

Simply put, my gut says there are almost no implementations of  
Fieldable "in the wild", and those that are won't mind a few lines of  
code change here and there to accommodate Fieldable changing (since  
Fields really are just simple data structures and don't due much  
algorithmically, except maybe LazyField)

Thus, here's the vote part:

1. We mark Fieldable as being subject to change.  We heavily advertise  
(on java-dev and java-user and maybe general) that in the next minor  
release of Lucene (2.4), Fieldable will be changing.  It is also  
marked at the top of CHANGES.txt very clearly for all the world to  
see.  Since 2.4 is probably at least a month away, I think this gives  
anyone with a pulse enough time to react.

2. We thus allow 1340 and 1219 to go forward, and maybe some others.

3. [OPTIONAL] We commit to rethinking input Documents and output  
Documents for 3.x per Hoss' design suggestions in the email thread  
above.  At a minimum, it becomes an abstract base class.

+1 to all 3 items from me.


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

View raw message