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 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:23:59 GMT
Hello,

(just using Yonik's email to reply, but my comments are more general)


----- Original Message ----
> From: Yonik Seeley <yseeley@gmail.com>
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, March 9, 2010 10:04:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
> 
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
> > I have built 10s of projects that
> > have simply used Lucene as an API and had no need for Solr, and I've built
> > 10s of projects where Solr made perfect sense. So, I appreciate their
> > separation.
> 
> As does everyone - which is why there will always be separate
> downloads.  As a user, the only side affect you should see is an
> improved Lucene and Solr.
> 
> Saying that Solr should move some stuff to Lucene for Lucene's
> benefit, without regard to if it's actually benefitial to Solr, is a
> non-starter.  The lucene/solr committers have been down that road
> before.  The solution that most committers agreed would improve the
> development of both projects is to merge development.

* I'd completely understand the "non-starter" part if Lucene and Solr had disjoint sets of
committers.  But that's not the case.

* Which is why I (like a few others) don't see why this whole thing cannot be solved by "better
discussion of what to develop where from the get-go"

* Whenever people listed features built in Solr that really should have been in Lucene, I
wondered "so why were not they developed in Lucene in the first place?"  Again, this should
be possible because the same person can commit to both projects.

* I hear Grant's explanation on wanting something in Solr ASAP and not wanting to commit that
something to Lucene (even though it logically belongs there) because Solr is not on Lucene
trunk, but isn't this just a matter of getting "Lucene trunk nightly -> Solr trunk lib
in svn" process going?

* Ian is 100% right.  This stuff clearly requires more discussion and a proper VOTE should
wait a week or so.

Otis

Mime
View raw message