lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: Proposal about Version API "relaxation"
Date Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:22:54 GMT
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Marvin Humphrey
<marvin@rectangular.com> wrote:

> Essentially, we're free to break back compat within "Lucy" at any time, but
> we're not able to break back compat within a stable fork like "Lucy1",
> "Lucy2", etc.  So what we'll probably do during normal development with
> Analyzers is just change them and note the break in the Changes file.

So... what if we change up how we develop and release Lucene:

  * A major release always bumps the major release number (2.x ->
    3.0), and, starts a new branch for all minor (3.1, 3.2, 3.3)
    releases along that branch

  * There is no back compat across major releases (index nor APIs),
    but full back compat within branches.

This would match how many other projects work (KS/Lucy, as Marvin
describes above; Apache Tomcat; Hibernate; log4J; FreeBSD; etc.).

The 'stable' branch (say 3.x now for Lucene) would get bug fixes, and,
if any devs have the itch, they could freely back-port improvements
from trunk as long as they kept back-compat within the branch.

I think in such a future world, we could:

  * Remove Version entirely!

  * Not worry at all about back-compat when developing on trunk

  * Give proper names to new improved classes instead of
    StandardAnalzyer2, or SmartStandardAnalyzer, that we end up doing
    today; rename existing classes.

  * Let analyzers freely, incrementally improve

  * Use interfaces without fear

  * Stop spending the truly substantial time (look @ Uwe's awesome
    back-compat layer for analyzers!) that we now must spend when
    adding new features, for back-compat

  * Be more free to introduce very new not-fully-baked features/APIs,
    marked as experimental, on the expectation that once they are used
    (in trunk) they will iterate/change/improve vs trying so hard to
    get things right on the first go for fear of future back compat
    horrors.

Thoughts...?

Mike

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