lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Busch <busch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 2.9.1
Date Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:21:37 GMT
Yeah, if everyone else is okay with the one-time performance hit during 
merge (details in LUCENE-1960), then I'm also +1 for cutting 2.9.1 tomorrow!

  Michael

On 10/25/09 5:37 PM, Michael McCandless wrote:
> Uwe, or anyone, any objections to cutting a 2.9.1 RC tomorrow?  It
> looks like LUCENE-1960 is going to go with the decompress-on-merge
> option?
>
> Mike
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Uwe Schindler<uwe@thetaphi.de>  wrote:
>    
>> I try to get the rest of search deprecations away in 3.0, but then we should
>> be sure, that there are no more such problems like with the posIncrement in
>> QueryParser that need additional changes in 2.9.1 API.
>>
>> Maybe somebody can help me with the rest of LUCENE-1973, the rest is
>> explain() in Scorer (hard to do because lots of references to this method
>> even in core), then we have IndexSearcher.fieldSortDoTrackScores /
>> IS.fieldSortDoMaxScore (which is simple I think - I even did not know that
>> these settings existed) and last but not least the deprecated
>> MultiValueSource. The hardest one is the first.
>>
>> After that all deprecations are removed, only some small things need to be
>> solved like the overridesTokenStreamMethod in Analyzer (I would keep it in
>> 3.0, as we cannot guarantee that every analyzer reuses tokenstreams unless
>> we make all core/contrib analyzers final). And there are some deprecated
>> classes to be removed in 4.0 when the support for old indexes is gone.
>>
>> Open is still the problem with compressed fields (see LUCENE-1960), if we
>> use option 3 (isCompressed() deprec method, we have to add it to 2.9, too ->
>> I would not prefer this).
>>
>> After that 3.0 is also almost finished, I have generics (almost) everywhere
>> in core, Parameter ->  enum replacement, StringBuilder, varargs (not yet
>> finished, I have to visit method signatures and add varargs where possible).
>> New Number() removed by valueOf(),... Some new defaults also need to be
>> implemented.
>>
>> Also some final revisiting of generics should be done, there are some
>> strange parts with collections where it is not clearly defined what's in it.
>>
>> Uwe
>>
>> -----
>> 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: Friday, October 23, 2009 11:27 PM
>>> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: 2.9.1
>>>
>>> OK we are now down to 0 issues!!  It's been exciting :)
>>>
>>> Assuming nothing crops up over the weekend, I plan to start the
>>> release process on Monday.
>>>
>>> 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
>>
>>
>>      
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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