lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Earwin Burrfoot <>
Subject Re: Lucene/Solr JIRA
Date Wed, 18 May 2011 21:43:39 GMT
+1 to Chris.

Even if the code is partially shared and project is the same, the end
products are completely different.
Merging lists/jira will force niche developers/users to manually sift
through heaps of irrelevant emails/issues.

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 00:53, Chris Hostetter <> wrote:
> : just a few words. I disagree here with you hoss IMO the suggestion to
> : merge JIRA would help to move us closer together and help close the
> : gap between Solr and Lucene. I think we need to start identifying us
> : with what we work on. It feels like we don't do that today and we
> : should work hard to stop that and make hard breaks that might hurt but
> I just don't see how you think that would help anything ... we still need
> to distinguish Jira issues to identify where in the "stack" they affect.
> If there is a "divide" among the developers because of the niches where
> they tend to work, will that divide magicly go away because we partition
> all issues using the "component" feature of instead of by the Jira
> "project" feature?
> I don't really see how that makes any sense.
> Even if we all thought it did, and even if the cost/effort of
> migrating/converting were totally free, the user bases (who interact with
> the Solr APIs vs directly using the Lucene-Core/Module APIs) are so
> distinct that I genuinely think sticking with distinct Jira "Projects"
> makes more sense for our users.
> : JIRA. I'd go even further and nuke the name entirely and call
> : everything lucene - I know not many folks like the idea and it might
> : take a while to bake in but I think for us (PMC / Committers) and the
> "Everything" already is called Lucene ... the Project is "Apache Lucene"
> the community is "Lucene" ... the Lucene project currently releases
> several products, and one of them is called "Apache Solr" ... if you're
> suggestion that we should ultimately elimianate the name "Solr" then we'd
> still have to decide what we're going going to call that end product, the
> artifact that we ship that provides the abstraction layer that Solr
> currently provides.
> Even if you mean to suggest that we should only have one unified product
> -- one singular release artifact -- that abstraction layer still needs a
> name.  The name we have now is "Solr", it has brand awareness and a user
> base who understands what it means to say they are "Installing Solr" or
> that a new feature is available when "Using Solr"
> Eliminating that name doesn't seem like it would benefit the user
> community in anyway.
> -Hoss
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко
Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
ICQ: 104465785

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

View raw message