Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of cutting@gmail.com designates
 74.125.92.26 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:sender;
        b=DJaXKx8YRu+uouP+1xA4WXcA0FBoqNJ6ts9J0zMZ0r0ZPvcJ9qwjjXxfKxnW8E6aw6
         QhaG3uGPIOGzcsi/0znIde9OzsHvPqoXV/Ak49aMrFsXQqetkdyWlJbaE0b+UkQKlPWg
         T/EfH79smGXyF7Mxe+GEk3Vq7p/ibeWkJslQA=
Message-ID: <4936CAEA.7060204@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:07:38 -0800
From: Doug Cutting <cutting@apache.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081125)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1473) Implement Externalizable in main
 top level searcher classes
References: <41374798.1228260644495.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
	 <1ED0734C-DB5A-4047-8A65-034CE092A12E@gmail.com>
	 <8837fb770812021602r475d6be5q2d022e7415949049@mail.gmail.com>
	 <C932291B-7698-43C4-816A-FF5D1B593009@gmail.com>
 <8837fb770812021622s76a0b49di6304155be51e8bed@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8837fb770812021622s76a0b49di6304155be51e8bed@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: Doug Cutting <cutting@gmail.com>

John Wang wrote:
> If you guys need help, maybe you guys should expand your committer list?

Committers are added when they've contributed a series of high-quality 
patches that have been committed, and demonstrated their ability to be 
easy to work with.  Displaying anger is not a good way to become a 
committer.  Calm persistence is advised.

Lucene does not currently use Java Serialization much.  Many committers 
may not be terribly familiar with it.

> Use case: deploying lucene in a distributed environment, we have a
> broker/server architecture. (standard stuff), we want roll out search
> servers with lucene 2.4 instance by instance. The problem is that the
> broker is sending a Query object to the searcher via java
> serialization at the server level, and the broker is running 2.3. And
> because of specifically this problem, 2.3 brokers cannot to talk to
> 2.4 search servers even when the Query object was not changed.

Thanks for providing a use case.  One way to address this would be for 
Lucene to better support cross-version serialization.  Another way might 
be for your application, which adds this requirement, to use an 
alternate representation for queries that it can guarantee is compatible 
across versions, e.g., a string.  Might that be possible?

Doug

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