lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Willnauer <simon.willna...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Release 3.0 soon
Date Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:27:28 GMT
I moved ***LUCENE-1845 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1845>*and
***LUCENE-1081 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1081>* to 3.1.
I'm not sure about the JAR / Build issue it has not happened for a long time
though and there may be much better solutions. this does not need to block
3.0 at all.
The function query issue does not make sense for 3.0, removing experimental
status is kind of a new feature though.
I assigned https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2051 and will get it
done by today I hope.

simon
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 1:49 AM, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> wrote:

>  Yes open an issue and we just discuss if the RuntimeException gets a
> IOException or an unchecked UnexpectedSucess- öhm
> UnexspectedInterruptException (or something like that).
>
>
>
> I go sleeping now…
>
> Uwe
>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Michael McCandless [mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 11, 2009 1:45 AM
>
> *To:* java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: Release 3.0 soon
>
>
>
> Thanks for all your "heavy committing" ;)
>
>
>
> We also have the open thread about how to handle Thread.interrupt().  I'll
> open an issue for it...
>
>
>
> LUCENE-2047 shouldn't block 3.0 -- I'll push it out.  LUCENE-2050 I should
> finish in time.
>
>
>
> I think it's OK to do LUCENE-1558 in 3.0, as long as we clearly call out
> the change?
>
>
>
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> wrote:
>
> Hi other developers,
>
>
>
> I am still on heavy committing, but I think we have fixed almost everyting
> for Lucene 3.0. The public API uses generics, enum, varargs,...; all
> deprecations scheduled for 3.0 are removed. The following issues are still
> open:
>
>
>
> *Key*
>
> *Summary*
>
> *Assignee*
>
> *LUCENE-1558 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1558>*
>
> Make IndexReader/Searcher ctors readOnly=true by default
>
> Michael McCandless
>
> *LUCENE-1370 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1370>*
>
> Patch to make ShingleFilter output a unigram if no ngrams can be generated
>
> Karl Wettin
>
> *LUCENE-1948 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948>*
>
> Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
>
> Karl Wettin
>
> *LUCENE-1973 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973>*
>
> Remove deprecated query components
>
> Uwe Schindler
>
> *LUCENE-2052 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2052>*
>
> Scan method signatures and add varargs where possible
>
> Uwe Schindler
>
> *LUCENE-1845 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1845>*
>
> if the build fails to download JARs for contrib/db, just skip its tests
>
> Simon Willnauer
>
> *LUCENE-1698 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1698>*
>
> Change backwards-compatibility policy
>
> Michael Busch
>
> *LUCENE-2024 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2024>*
>
> "ant dist" no longer generates md5's for the top-level artifacts
>
> Unassigned
>
> *LUCENE-2047 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2047>*
>
> IndexWriter should immediately resolve deleted docs to docID in
> near-real-time mode
>
> Michael McCandless
>
> *LUCENE-2050 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2050>*
>
> Improve contrib/benchmark for testing near-real-time search performance
>
> Michael McCandless
>
> *LUCENE-2051 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2051>*
>
> Contrib Analyzer Setters should be deprecated and replace with ctor
> arguments
>
> Unassigned
>
> *LUCENE-1081 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1081>*
>
> Remove the "Experimental" warnings from search.function package
>
> Unassigned
>
> *LUCENE-1909 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1909>*
>
> Make IndexReader.DEFAULT_TERMS_INDEX_DIVISOR public
>
> Grant Ingersoll
>
>
>
> The red one is finished, I just wait for comments or something against.
> The yellow one needs to be discussed. The other ones are simple fixes that
> should be resolved soon.
>
>
>
> I left out the Java-5-Issue, because it is a neverending story (you can
> always find unneeded casts, generics warnings,…), but the import thing is,
> that the public API is generified. Everything else can be easily fixed after
> release of 3.0.
>
>
>
> LUCENE-1558 has one problem: The methods were deprecated in 2.9, but
> reappear with different behaviour in 3.0, which is bad. Maybe we should add
> them in 3.1 again, so users coming from 2.9 will not see strange behaviour.
> Else it should be marked red in the changes backwards section, that the
> methods were undeprecated, because they are no longer the same methods like
> before and now have different behaviour. So something like: “was deprecated
> in 2.9 because no support for the previous behaviour anymore. Readded in 3.0
> as “new methods”.
>
>
>
> I want to start the release process during the weekend (my first tests as
> release manager), so I can throw out RC1 on next Monday or so.
>
>
>
> Uwe
>
>
>
> -----
>
> Uwe Schindler
>
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
>
> http://www.thetaphi.de
>
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>
>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message