lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: contrib and lucene 3.0
Date Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:39:12 GMT
definitely wasn't trying to single you out, again.

besides, this isn't the only instance. just the one that i could remember.

I'll set LUCENE-1606 to 3.1, even tho it doesn't deprecate anything, lets
focus on clearing this shit up and making a clean 3.0 release.

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Michael McCandless <
lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:

> Mea culpa ;)  (on LUCENE-1781)
>
> And I agree we need a better solution in general.  I think not
> deprecating new stuff until the .0 release is out seems best?  I think
> this .0 release is also especially challenging because we're (well,
> Uwe and a few others -- thanks)'re taking advantage of 1.5's new
> features.  Hopefully, for 4.0, it'll be less work and faster
> turnaround.
>
> Mike
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Negative shcmegative :)
> >
> > Your right - this needs to be handled better. If we are going to add new
> > deprecations before all of the old deprecations are removed, there needs
> > to be help in the javadocs.
> >
> > Of course its nothing against those that did it - they likely didn't see
> > this issue - I don't think any of us ever care about blame or fault.
> > Just solutions ;) And this needs one.
> >
> > Robert Muir wrote:
> >> I don't want to come across as negative here... i'm not trying to
> >> single anyone out,
> >> just a bit confused as to why my issue was singled out when theres
> >> already been both new features and new deprecations added to 3.0,
> >> and the issue in question doesnt even have any deprecations. then
> >> again i don't really care if its in 3.0 or 3.1, but its just wierd.
> >>
> >> a search on 'deprecated' in contrib is pretty enlightening.
> >>
> >> here's an example from spatial: DistanceApproximation entire class
> >> deprecated!
> >>
> >>  * @deprecated This has been replaced with more accurate
> >>  * math in {@link LLRect}.
> >>
> >> this deprecation traces back to LUCENE-1781, which is marked as Fix
> >> Version 2.9
> >> makes me want to delete it, except if you check contrib/CHANGES, you
> >> see it wasn't actually applied until 3.0
> >> so it shouldnt be deleted yet.
> >>
> >> again, not trying to be negative, +1 to both the contributor(s) and
> >> committers that fixed this bug in spatial, as I sure don't understand
> it.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com
> >> <mailto:markrmiller@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     What deprecations were already added?
> >>
> >>     Robert Muir wrote:
> >>     > well, not to complain, but I will mention on this topic.
> >>     >
> >>     > If something is marked deprecated, its 10x easier if in the
> javadocs
> >>     > there is some version information applied.
> >>     >
> >>     > In the wild west that is contrib, its currently a bit difficult
> >>     for me
> >>     > to clear out the deprecations from 2.9, because there are new
> >>     > deprecations added in 3.0.
> >>     > it takes svn annotate + jira + CHANGES to figure out exactly what
> >>     > should be cleared out (and sometimes these all seem to disagree,
> Fix
> >>     > Version != Changes, etc etc)
> >>     >
> >>     > This is why i only did part of LUCENE-2022
> >>     >
> >>     > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Mark Miller
> >>     <markrmiller@gmail.com <mailto:markrmiller@gmail.com>
> >>     > <mailto:markrmiller@gmail.com <mailto:markrmiller@gmail.com>>>
> >>     wrote:
> >>     >
> >>     >     I have no problem with new features either - but I would
> >>     vote that
> >>     >     if it
> >>     >     requires new deprecations, it should wait.
> >>     >
> >>     >     I think its nice to have a clean release first. And I also
> >>     don't think
> >>     >     any of this features should hold up the 3.0 release. Lets
> >>     get it out -
> >>     >     then focus on new features.
> >>     >
> >>     >     Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> >>     >     > How do you handle deprecations of old stuff for the new
> >>     contribution
> >>     >     > (assuming it needs it)?  Seems weird to have a major
> >>     release that
> >>     >     > immediately has deprecations.  At the same time, it seems
> >>     weird to
> >>     >     > have a major release that doesn't contain new features.  If
> >>     >     anything,
> >>     >     > it is our best opportunity to put in new stuff
> >>     >     >
> >>     >     > Traditionally, the only difference between .9 and .0 has
> been
> >>     >     removal
> >>     >     > of deprecations.  This time around we are saying also JDK
> 1.5.
> >>     >     >
> >>     >     > Not saying we can't do it, just wondering.
> >>     >     >
> >>     >     > On Oct 30, 2009, at 3:31 PM, DM Smith wrote:
> >>     >     >
> >>     >     >> I don't see any reason to freeze new contributions from
any
> >>     >     release.
> >>     >     >>
> >>     >     >> On 10/30/2009 03:19 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> >>     >     >>> thanks Michael.
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>> does anyone else have any opinion on this issue?
> >>     >     >>> fyi we already have several new features committed
to
> >>     3.0 contrib
> >>     >     >>> already (see contrib/CHANGES),
> >>     >     >>> but I don't too much care either way, if I should
not be
> >>     >     adding this
> >>     >     >>> feature to 3.0, I'd like to set the version in jira
to 3.1
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Michael McCandless
> >>     >     >>> <lucene@mikemccandless.com
> >>     <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com>
> >>     <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com
> >>
> >>     >     <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com
> >>     <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com>
> >>     >     <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com
> >>     <mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com>>>> wrote:
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>     I think we should allow new features into contrib
> >>     for 3.0.
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>     I don't even like holding new features from core
for
> >>     3.0.
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>     In general I don't think it's healthy when trunk
is
> >>     locked
> >>     >     down....
> >>     >     >>>     Trunk should be like a locomotive that's plowing
> >>     ahead at
> >>     >     all times.
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>     Mike
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>     On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Robert Muir
> >>     >     <rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>>
> >>     >     >>>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>>>>
wrote:
> >>     >     >>>     > Hi,
> >>     >     >>>     >
> >>     >     >>>     > What is the consensus on new features for
contrib
> >>     for Lucene
> >>     >     >>>     3.0? I know
> >>     >     >>>     > that for core, its mostly a java 5 upgrade
and
> >>     deprecation
> >>     >     >>>     removal.
> >>     >     >>>     >
> >>     >     >>>     > I want to make sure LUCENE-1606 is set to
the
> >>     right version,
> >>     >     >>>     but I figured
> >>     >     >>>     > its really not just about that specific issue,
I
> would
> >>     >     like to
> >>     >     >>>     know the
> >>     >     >>>     > plans in general.
> >>     >     >>>     >
> >>     >     >>>     > Thanks,
> >>     >     >>>     > Robert
> >>     >     >>>     >
> >>     >     >>>     > --
> >>     >     >>>     > Robert Muir
> >>     >     >>>     > rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>>
> >>     >     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>>>
> >>     >     >>>     >
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>     >     >>>     To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >>     >     java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
> >>     >     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>>
> >>     >     >>>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
> >>     >     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>>>
> >>     >     >>>     For additional commands, e-mail:
> >>     >     java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>
> >>     >     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>>
> >>     >     >>>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>
> >>     >     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>>>
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>>
> >>     >     >>> --
> >>     >     >>> Robert Muir
> >>     >     >>> rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>>
> >>     >     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>>>
> >>     >     >>
> >>     >     >
> >>     >     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >     --
> >>     >     - Mark
> >>     >
> >>     >     http://www.lucidimagination.com
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>     >     To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >>     java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
> >>     >     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>>
> >>     >     For additional commands, e-mail:
> >>     java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>
> >>     >     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>>
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     > --
> >>     > Robert Muir
> >>     > rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >>     <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>>
> >>
> >>
> >>     --
> >>     - Mark
> >>
> >>     http://www.lucidimagination.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>     To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
> >>     For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>     <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Robert Muir
> >> rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Mark
> >
> > http://www.lucidimagination.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>
>


-- 
Robert Muir
rcmuir@gmail.com

Mime
View raw message