lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: modularization discussion
Date Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:36:30 GMT
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org> wrote:

> I think this needs a bit more explanation.  AIUI, the primary cause for concern is that
by making something a module, you are taking a private, internal API of Solr's and now making
it a public API that must be maintained (and backwards maintained) which could slow down development
as one now needs to be concerned with more factors than you would if it were merely an implementation
detail in Solr.

This concern doesn't make sense to me: if we mark a module
experimental, we are fully free to change it, even drastically.

Pre-merge, I agree, it was a nightmare factoring code across
projects... but now that we are merged, and now that we have
@experimental, I don't understand this argument.

Maybe we can take a concrete example, eg LUCENE-2995 (factored out
"suggest" module): how does this being its own module hurt Solr?

Mike

http://blog.mikemccandless.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message