lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Kubes <ku...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
Date Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:59:59 GMT


Michael McCandless wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Andrzej Bialecki <ab@getopt.org> wrote:
> 
>> Re: Nutch components - those that are reusable in Lucene or Solr
>> contexts eventually find their way to respective projects, witness
>> e.g. CommonGrams.
> 
> In fact I think this is a great example -- as far as I can tell,
> CommonGrams was poached from Nutch, into Solr, and then was
> nurtured/improved in both projects separately right?
> 
> So.... can/should we freely poach across all our sub projects?

IMO yes.  Absolutely.  That is exactly what OSS is all about.  Find 
something useful, improve upon it.

> 
> It has obvious downsides (it's essentially a fork that will confuse
> those users that use both Solr & Lucene, in the short term, until
> things "stabilize" into a clean refactoring; it's double the dev; we
> must re-sync with time; etc.).

True.  OSS development is messy at times.  And it can take longer.

> 
> But it has a massive upside: it means we don't rely only on "push"
> (Solr devs to push into Lucene or vice/versa).  We can also use "pull"
> (Lucene devs can pull pieces from Nutch/Solr into Lucene).  It becomes
> a 2-way street for "properly" factoring our shared code with time.
> 
> If we had that freedom ("poaching is perfectly fine"), then,
> interested devs could freely "refactor" across sub projects.

There is nothing stopping any developer, committer or not from making 
changes to any apache project including Nutch, Lucene, and Solr. 
Merging doesn't change or improve that.  At best it makes it more 
confusing where responsibilities lie.

Dennis

> 
> Not having this freedom today, and not having merged dev, is stunting
> both Solr & Lucene's growth.
> 
> Mike

Mime
View raw message