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: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 3.2.0
Date Mon, 30 May 2011 20:25:03 GMT
On 5/30/2011 at 5:16 AM, Shai Erera wrote:
> LUCENE-3004 is marked a blocker for 3.2 - are we going
> to move it to 3.3 or hold up 3.2?

+1 to move LUCENE-3004 to 3.3.

On 5/30/2011 at 3:53 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> As much as I love LUCENE-3147, I'm not sure if we should
> try to shove code changes that aren't blockers into 3.2...

-1 to including non-blocking issues in re-spun RCs.

> Here is my proposal: let's open a JIRA issue for each
> thing that was found, and we decide which are blockers
> and we backport those to the branch. The rest we should
> try to fix in 3.3

+1

On 5/30/2011 at 4:16 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Steven A Rowe <sarowe@syr.edu> wrote:
> > 3. Contrib Javadocs include links to removed contribs ant,
> > db, lucli, and swing. -1 to RC1 based on this.
>
> While I agree with most of the other things you said,
> I voice some disagreement here. I'm not sure things
> like this in contrib should block a release.
>
> if its so important that it blocks a release, then it
> should be in our core product.

IMHO, users won't make this distinction.  Advertising non-existent components is bad enough
that it should block a release.

Steve

Mime
View raw message