lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steven Rowe (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2923) cleanup contrib/demo
Date Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:14:24 GMT


Steven Rowe commented on LUCENE-2923:

bq. Can someone lookover my changes to the build xml files? (Especially the Maven part, where
I completely guessed!).

I skimmed the patch and can see that you removed the specializations of the {{dist-maven}}
task in both {{modules/benchmark/}} and {{lucene/contrib/demo/}}.  For benchmark, the specialization
was trivial and didn't change any behavior, so I assume that's why you dropped it.  In the
demo case, the specialization was introduced to be able to deploy the {{.war}} file, but since
the {{.war}} file is no longer produced, the {{dist-maven}} specialization is no longer required.
 Later today I'll have time to apply the patch and do sanity checking on the maven outputs.

One thing left to do (I can handle this separately): change the Maven POMs for the benchmark
and demo modules.

> cleanup contrib/demo
> --------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-2923
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Michael McCandless
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2923.patch, LUCENE-2923.patch, LUCENE-2923.patch
> I don't think we should include optimize in the demo; many people start from the demo
and may think you must optimize to do searching, and that's clearly not the case.
> I think we should also use a buffered reader in FileDocument?
> And... I'm tempted to remove IndexHTML (and the html parser) entirely.  It's ancient,
and we now have Tika to extract text from many doc formats.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see:


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message