Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of
 SRS0=2VkTHF=JY=basetechnology.com=jack@yourhostingaccount.com designates
 65.254.253.28 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <96B50AAA6A3C4E76A77CF7A877171C88@JackKrupansky>
From: "Jack Krupansky" <jack@basetechnology.com>
To: <dev@lucene.apache.org>
References: <1354077819942-4022834.post@n3.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <1354077819942-4022834.post@n3.nabble.com>
Subject: Re: dismax vs edismax
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 00:24:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
Sender: "Jack Krupansky" <jack@basetechnology.com>

My view is that if we simply added an option to edismax to restrict the 
syntax to the very limited syntax of dismax, then we could have one, common 
xdismax query parser.

And then, why not simply rename the current Solr query parser to "classic" 
and make the new xdismax be the default Solr query parser.

And then... push a lot of the so-called "Solr-specific" features down into 
the Lucene query parser (abstracting away the specifics of Solr schema, Solr 
plugin, Solr parameter format, etc.) and then we can have one, unified query 
parser for Lucene and Solr. But... not everyone is persuaded!

-- Jack Krupansky

-----Original Message----- 
From: David Smiley (@MITRE.org)
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 11:43 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: dismax vs edismax

It was my hope that by now, the dismax & edismax distinction would be a 
thing
of the past, such that we'd simply call this by one name, simply "dismax".
>From memories of various JIRA commentary, Jan wants this too and made great
progress enhancing edismax, but Hoss pushed back on edismax overtaking
dismax as "the" one new dismax.  I see this as very unfortunate, as having
both complicates things and makes it harder to write them in books ;-)  I'd
love to simply say "dismax" without having to say "edismax" or wonder if
when someone said "dismax" they meant "edismax", etc.  Does anyone see this
changing / progressing?

~ David


-----
Author: http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book
--
View this message in context: 
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/dismax-vs-edismax-tp4022834.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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


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