lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven A Rowe <sar...@syr.edu>
Subject RE: wind down for 3.1?
Date Sun, 13 Feb 2011 04:06:29 GMT
David, you have been using solr-dev@l.a.o lately - would you please switch to dev@l.a.o?  solr-dev
was deprecated when Solr merged with Lucene.  It gets quite confusing to try to follow discussions
you participate on, when they are across multiple mailing lists.  When people reply to your
solr-dev@ messages, they're routed to dev@ (maybe the Reply-To header?).

Thanks,
Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Smiley (@MITRE.org) [mailto:DSMILEY@mitre.org]
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 7:39 PM
> To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: wind down for 3.1?
> 
> 
> I don't want to overstep my role in this conversation (not being a
> committer
> as much as I want to be), but shouldn't there be some thought about what
> we
> should *add* to 3.x before 3.x gets rushed out the door? I have no doubt
> 3.x
> will be stable; I didn't mean "rushed" in that sense.  I'm sure we have in
> our minds an issue or two that for whatever reason hasn't been committed
> but
> should be.  Well I take that back, I'm talking to the wrong group of folks
> since you all would have committed it then! ;-)
> 
> One that comes to mind (and to several others I know) is SOLR-1709
> Distributed date faceting. This has had working code for a long time,
> though
> admittedly not a proper patch nor tests.  That issue sorely needs to get
> committed IMO.  And then, it may not qualify as a "bug", but a release is
> an
> opportunity to tidy up the /browse interface.  I tried to use it recently
> in
> 3x and it felt half-baked.  FWIW, this is a competitive advantage that
> Endeca has over Solr -- they have a default browser that is quite good and
> its indispensable.
> 
> I'm tempted to also bring up my distaste for the next version of Solr
> being
> 3.something instead of 1.5 (in fact I just did) but I'll just leave it at
> that.  AFAIK that battle was lost months ago.
> 
> ~ David Smiley
> 
> 
> Robert Muir wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > Despite this, I propose we do a 'casual freeze' on the 3.x code base
> > in 7 days time, in other words we agree for a few weeks we will focus
> > on bugs and tests only in branch_3x and try to shorten, not length the
> > list of issues in JIRA (unless these issues are bugs!).
> >
> > The reason I say this, versus creating a release branch right now, is
> > that I think we should take advantage of our stable branch (branch_3x)
> > and avoid branching until the last minute: when we are ready to make
> > an RC.
> >
> > I think any features/improvements that cannot be done in 7 days should
> > really wait for 3.2 instead... and we shouldn't wait a year for that
> > one to release either... we have a stable branch, lets take advantage
> > of it.
> > ...
> >
> 
> 
> -----
>  Author: https://www.packtpub.com/solr-1-4-enterprise-search-server/book
> --
> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/wind-
> down-for-3-1-tp2414923p2483224.html
> Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Mime
View raw message