lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler" <...@thetaphi.de>
Subject RE: 2.9 issues remaining
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:44:50 GMT
Here it is, I hope I did not do the same cleanups in a different way than
you did them. I changed a lot in AttributeSource to make it better fit with
multiple attributes per instance (hashCode, toString() and equals() as well
as captureState/restoreState now work on implementation  instances.
captureRestore now also works, when the order of attributes is different.

 

-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de

  _____  

From: Michael Busch [mailto:buschmic@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 7:28 PM
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: 2.9 issues remaining

 

Hi Uwe,

I continued yesterday evening with making some cleanups on 1693. You can
leave it assigned to me, I'm working on it today.
I'll update to your latest patch after you submitted it.

 Michael

On 7/14/09 10:18 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote: 

Yes I make progress with 1693!!! I think I assign to this, as Michael seems
to have no time to review and work on it.
 
I am currently repairing the last problems and inconsistencies in the
AttributeSource with captureState and toString and so on, because attributes
can now be implemented by more than one impl and one impl can implement more
than one attribute (best example: Token).
 
I will post a patch very soon (the last tests are running now). I also added
a lot of new tests :-)
 
After that 1693 needs only your idea from 1678, to detect if in non-final
classes, any subclass overrides deprecated methods. Problematic core token
streams are:
- ISOLatin1Filter (no-final and deprecated, so maybe it should not implement
incrementToken at all) -> would be fixed then.
- KeywordTokenizer should normally be final, but is not :( -> needs this
special trick
- StandardTokenizer is the same, should be final, but isn't
 
If these three would not be there, I could finish 1693 now. Contrib
analyzers could have this prob, too, but this must be checked when doing the
transformation there. If the backwards wrapper is available, we could do
this like with the analyzers in 1678.
 
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
 
  

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael McCandless [mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 6:44 PM
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: 2.9 issues remaining
 
We are down to 20 issues left for 2.9!
 
For those of you who have 2.9 issues assigned to you, but haven't
started yet or won't be able to get to them soon, can you unassign
yourself, and/or push the issue out?
 
I'd like to start taking some of them.
 
I realize a number of issues are held up on LUCENE-1693, so we really
need get that [big] one done soon.
 
Mike
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
    

 
 
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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