Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9F1256215 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 19:47:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 46886 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jun 2011 19:47:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 46841 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jun 2011 19:47:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 46834 invoked by uid 99); 9 Jun 2011 19:47:43 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:47:43 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.85.160.48] (HELO mail-pw0-f48.google.com) (209.85.160.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:47:35 +0000 Received: by pwi16 with SMTP id 16so1248662pwi.35 for ; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.30.74 with SMTP id q10mr511967pbh.110.1307648835098; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bester.local ([65.78.136.75]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k9sm1657000pbc.22.2011.06.09.12.47.13 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 12:47:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Hostetter To: Lucene Dev Subject: solr example != solr defaults Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Trying to catch up on my email/jira, i notice this comment from rmuir in SOLR-2519... >> I think we need to stop kidding ourselves about example/default and >> just recognize that 99.99999999999% of users just use the example as >> their default configuration. Guys, the example is the default, there is >> simply not argument, this is the reality! While i agree that we should recognize and expect solr users to start with the example configs and use them as their "default configs" under no circumstances should we get in the habit of refering to things specified in those configs "the default behavior" or "the default settings" this isn't a question of kidding ourselves, it's a question of genuinely confusing users about the differnece between behavior that exists because of what is in the example configs that they may have copied and behavior that exists because of hardcoded defaults in java code. Example #1: for backwards compatability, the "default" lockType used in solr when no declaration is found is "simple" but the *example* declared in the *example* configs is "native". Example #2: Many request handler instances are declared/configured in the "example" solrconfig.xml file, but only 1 request handler instance will exist by *default* if the user removes those declarations from the solrconfig.xml The point is: If you find yourself getting into the habit of refering to config values/settings in the example configs as "the defaults" then you *will* misslead users into thinking that you are describing the "default behavior" when those values/settings are absent from the configs. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org