Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 73298 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2010 01:50:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 6 Apr 2010 01:50:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 85601 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2010 01:50:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 85419 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2010 01:50:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 85412 invoked by uid 99); 6 Apr 2010 01:50:48 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 01:50:48 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1223.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 01:50:47 +0000 Received: from brutus.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66761234C4AD for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 01:50:27 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <223577340.706491270518627418.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 01:50:27 +0000 (UTC) From: "Hoss Man (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2368) stopword files should be versioned; acessor for default(s) should take a Version property In-Reply-To: <251913555.706231270518027427.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2368?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12853691#action_12853691 ] Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-2368: ---------------------------------- bq. I wonder if we should just break now (by renaming these 3) and version all the files so its clean. I didn't realize we even had those. The other option is to *not* rename any of the files, but clearly document what the naming convention is coming forward -- as i mentioned in the comment i just added (with more details beyond the summary description) the names don't have to match Lucene Version semantics ... they just have to be something that is unique moving forward. Specificly: we should never modify the contents of the files, we should just add a new file and "deprecate" the old file. but the naming convention could easily be... stopwords_esperanto.txt stopwords_esperanto_2.txt stopwords_esperanto_3.txt ... > stopword files should be versioned; acessor for default(s) should take a Version property > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-2368 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2368 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Analysis > Reporter: Hoss Man > Fix For: 2.3.3 > > > The existing language specific stopword files on the trunk have no version info in their filenames -- this will make it awkward/confusing to update them as time goes on. LIkewise, many classes have a "getDefaultStopSet()" which makes these methods (when called by client code) suffer from the same API back-compat issues that the Analyzers themselves did before we added Version. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org