Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rcmuir@gmail.com designates
 74.125.83.176 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :content-type;
        b=eVQolKxC+H9UygBBAktEFxtn3mCCeDkpd8ccbFlqSnf5EWcl3JKCSyf2tqC2xepOzq
         aBglem72qnsMBhiv6ECsQzXZKxdWcwGkbmuD5+A8YIz7k24PQNi0D/TTUlEh3NbEJlYE
         Bq3sAkEtSg9FYn0hPUn00XF5O60hoeibbww1g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C7BBB6CA.DD81%Chris.A.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
References: <8f0ad1f31003090811y3549c7efm889d407027def5e2@mail.gmail.com>
	<C7BBB6CA.DD81%Chris.A.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
From: Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:48:01 -0500
Message-ID: <8f0ad1f31003090848t40f0bbd2s9c8daf04c3b5a577@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
To: general@lucene.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> Can you provide more detail on how it's failed? Did it fail because Solr
> wasn't able to upgrade to a newer Lucene that would fix the deprecations? If
> so, what were the reasons?
>

Its just more work. Besides the duplication functionality itself, in
Lucene we (mostly Uwe) developed code to assist with tasks like this.
For example, we have utility code that makes it easier to maintain
backwards compatibility, test harnesses, etc.

The job still isn't done, but to do it right, it only makes sense to
re-use these resources so its done safely and more effectively. But
this would require even more duplication!!!

>
> With which "hat" on? Where are you converting them? I'm guessing you mean
> one for Solr and one for Lucene(-java), right?

Both Solr and Lucene. I'm not wearing a hat in this case: its just
something that needs to be done and we are in it together.


-- 
Robert Muir
rcmuir@gmail.com