lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
Date Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:16:00 GMT
Hi Michael,

It¹s a good question. I think each side of the fence on this issue has their
own interpretation. Here¹s the Apache page on voting:

I think parts of Mike¹s 2nd proposal [1] (what we¹re voting on) include
elements that are procedural:

 * Merging the dev lists into a single list.
 * Release details will be decided by dev community, but, Lucene may
   release without Solr. (though I¹m not sure why this is included, b/c it¹s
the way that the communities work now?)

But others aren¹t:

 * Merging committers.

And these relate directly to code and will effect change:

 * When any change is committed (to a module that "belongs to" Solr or
   to Lucene), all tests must pass.
 * Modulariize the sources: pull things out of Lucene's core (break
   out query parser, move all core queries & analyzers under their
   contrib counterparts), pull things out of Solr's core (analyzers,

So, there are parts of this proposal that I believe VETO does in fact apply



On 3/8/10 6:49 PM, "Michael Busch" <> wrote:

> Question: Is it sufficient to have more +1s than -1s for this vote to
> pass? I thought for votes as significant as this one a -1 veto is a
> showstopper?

Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA

View raw message