lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <>
Subject Re: Finishing Lucene 2.9
Date Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:29:26 GMT
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Robert Muir<> wrote:
> But isn't it also true it could be a bit more than no-op:
> 1) changing to "better" defaults in cases where back compat prevents
> this. I think I remember a few of these?
> 2) bugfixes found after release of 2.9
> 3) performance improvements, not just from #1 but also from removal of
> back-compat shims (i.e. tokenstream reflection)

Sorry, right, there are some defaults we will change.

We may get bugfixes in, but if it's truly a "fast turnaround release",
I think there wouldn't be that many bug fixes.

And I agree on performance improvements for cases where the back
compat emulation code was hurting performance.

It seems like we have two questions:

  * Do we label the next release 2.9 or 3.0?

  * After that next release, do we do a "fast turnaround" release or a
more normal "take your time and do real work" release?


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

View raw message