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 35C0BD009 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:45:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 14889 invoked by uid 500); 14 Sep 2012 15:45:23 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 14802 invoked by uid 500); 14 Sep 2012 15:45:23 -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 14795 invoked by uid 99); 14 Sep 2012 15:45:22 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:45:22 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of tommaso.teofili@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.182 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.182] (HELO mail-wi0-f182.google.com) (209.85.212.182) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:45:17 +0000 Received: by wibhq12 with SMTP id hq12so3645378wib.5 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:44:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=oH2zQMQ3dOiwaMB5bkVVnT+nc+jB8iR4eTh+7wo0Jv0=; b=LNXeLWOnS6P1dBtvmXHubg0xNQVWCH7Acxb7+phe0NPgjQJYZx+tPX/8XnU2z46gSB xs2Rjw2CABfIsrteBjPCZj4uAbUT1MGrO+mDcx/d5W5uw7t7CtdiR2cTktszcVCBmWdi kKmBfi0kvqHPjFMwhVZBmG3qNpdfgRqC9fo7YW+Cw9L/n+p+TyGJ8y4MWtBlwH3lgbyw UKrtsRQlHfdWFeCWoxMH9fCmzEi9++kf8HICtVsWzrDOQQgUfHKjJbNiul2aEP0pNCC2 lnxFiU/bRq/C7U1Hpvb7Ez2DpxKk3eY5wJFadRCPX6No615fWkxBQT/j3mwzcsgFncdA VK9Q== Received: by 10.181.13.164 with SMTP id ez4mr6692456wid.21.1347637496285; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:44:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.5.7 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:44:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1347635591828-4007774.post@n3.nabble.com> From: Tommaso Teofili Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:44:15 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 4.0 planning To: dev@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0438eb5f408a1904c9ab4eb6 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --f46d0438eb5f408a1904c9ab4eb6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 2012/9/14 Robert Muir > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tommaso Teofili > wrote: > > > > I see your point, second option sounds much better. > > We could perhaps make a shortly due roadmap like: > > - fix whatever you want by date x (2/3/4 weeks) > > - code freeze for 1/2 weeks > > - release > > - celebrate :-) > > Personally I would prefer we don't do the first part. Adding some > arbitrary length of time like this to fix whatever you want invites a > "code-shoving" period where people are encouraged to rush things in to > get them by XYZ date. > > This can basically cause a huge destabilization of the codebase, and > its totally unnecessary. > good point. > > I would prefer we wind down now and do bugs, docs, tests, and > blockers. I don't like official code freezes either, I feel like we > can just work together on this and do what makes sense. > that's fine with me, let's do that ;) Tommaso > > -- > lucidworks.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org > > --f46d0438eb5f408a1904c9ab4eb6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2012/9/14 Robert Muir = <rcmuir@gmail.com<= /a>>
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Tommaso Teofili
<tommaso.= teofili@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I see your point, second option sounds much better.
> We could perhaps make a shortly due roadmap like:
> - fix whatever you want by date x (2/3/4 weeks)
> - code freeze for 1/2 weeks
> - release
> - celebrate :-)

Personally I would prefer we don't do the first part. Adding some=
arbitrary length of time like this to fix whatever you want invites a
"code-shoving" period where people are encouraged to rush things = in to
get them by XYZ date.

This can basically cause a huge destabilization of the codebase, and
its totally unnecessary.

good point.
=A0

I would prefer we wind down now and do bugs, docs, tests, and
blockers. I don't like official code freezes either, I feel like we
can just work together on this and do what makes sense.

that's fine with me, let's do that ;)
To= mmaso
=A0

--
lucidworks.com

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


--f46d0438eb5f408a1904c9ab4eb6--