Return-Path: 
 <general-return-1090-apmail-lucene-general-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 64937 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2009 16:35:03 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Mar 2009 16:35:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 94935 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2009 16:35:03 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 94391 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2009 16:35:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:general-help@lucene.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:general-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:general@lucene.apache.org>
List-Id: <general.lucene.apache.org>
Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list general@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 94369 invoked by uid 99); 7 Mar 2009 16:35:02 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 08:35:02 -0800
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0
	tests=SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [209.85.132.241] (HELO an-out-0708.google.com) (209.85.132.241)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 16:34:52 +0000
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c37so451505anc.5
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 08:34:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.100.136.18 with SMTP id j18mr2572678and.77.1236443670322;
        Sat, 07 Mar 2009 08:34:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?10.17.4.4? (pool-173-48-164-75.bstnma.fios.verizon.net
 [173.48.164.75])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d22sm4429645and.27.2009.03.07.08.34.28
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Sat, 07 Mar 2009 08:34:29 -0800 (PST)
Cc: general@lucene.apache.org
Message-Id: <B81F515D-4552-4927-B243-F1E88D5C8102@mikemccandless.com>
From: Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com>
To: lucy-dev@lucene.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <6c59d89a0903070541j1726df4bk8ab3547e24402f0a@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Archive Lucy
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:34:29 -0500
References: <B7E8D91D-EE40-49A4-B98D-A19BD043FF1E@apache.org>
 <20090306215814.GA9277@rectangular.com>
 <A06C2FC0-B7F7-4F4D-B485-8DDF15D6AB68@apache.org>
 <ADCB446C-44FC-458B-B1BB-BD4B01B6D3AC@apache.org>
 <517D3BE8-6019-41DD-99A2-EAD7A4870069@mikemccandless.com>
 <6c59d89a0903070541j1726df4bk8ab3547e24402f0a@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org


Torsten Curdt wrote:

>>>  I do want a C port of Lucene (even a loose one).
>>
>>
>> BTW, I think "loose" ports are far more interesting than strict  
>> ports,
>> since they have the freedom to introduce neat innovations, enabling
>> two-way cross fertilization.  Lucene grows much more due to loose
>> ports.  I've learned so much more from Marvin, and Lucene has
>> benefited far more from Marvin's work, than from the strict Lucene
>> ports.
>
> Talking about that - have you guys seen this?
>
> http://vafer.org/blog/20090107014544
>
> LuceneKit is a Objective-C port. I think it would be great to have it
> part of the Lucene community. But I fear it has similar problems that
> Lucy has.

Excellent!  I hadn't seen LuceneKit, thanks.

Mike