lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
Date Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:36:39 GMT
Hi,


----- Original Message ----
> From: Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org>
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, March 9, 2010 5:00:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
> 
> 
On Mar 9, 2010, at 12:38 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> * I think Grant may be right.  We don't need this 
> discussion.  Because the Solr/Lucene developer overlap is excellent, why 
> not just start moving selected Solr code to new Lucene modules, just like Mike 
> proposed we move Analysis from Lucene core to a new Lucene module?

Note, 
> if you read what I said again you will realize I wasn't actually proposing 
> this.  I was saying actually, that I think it would not be something that 
> people really wanted, even though it is perfectly "legal", just like poaching is 
> perfectly "legal", but isn't, in my mind a good solution.  Sigh.  The 
> problem with email, I guess, especially on long threads.


My feeling was that majority of people said poaching (in a very positive sense) is the way
OSS works.
Why can't we start with poaching/refactoring and then, in N months, evaluate both the outcome
and the process and see if things can work that way in the future[*] or something more drastic
should be done?

Additionally, if I understand things correctly, poaching is only needed when the code is not
committed in the "right" project/location to begin with.

Otis

Mime
View raw message