lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Proposal for changing Lucene's backwards-compatibility policy
Date Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:53:37 GMT
Mark Miller wrote:
> Michael Busch wrote:
>   
>>  Why will just saying once again "Hey, let's just release more often"
>> work now if it hasn't in the last two years?
>>
>>  Mich
>>     
>
> I don't know that we need to release more often to take advantage of
> major numbers. 2.2 was released in 07 - we could have just released 2.9
> right after 2.2 rather than also releasing 2.3 and 2.4. The number of
> releases between major releases is self imposed.
>
>   
And actually - even 2.9, which took so long, didn't have to. A .9
release could be very fast and only done as a stepping stone to the next
major release. The pain of how long everything took was just self
imposed. We could have moved to 3.0 years ago easily if someone has
suggested so. The truth is, all the deprecation complain stuff only
recently reached a boil - so noone suggested moving to the next major
version faster long enough ago. When they did, we jumped from 2.4 to
2.9. And the 2.9 was a huge release - but again, it didn't have to be.
It could have been a formality - Grant was arguing at one point that it
should have been.

-- 
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message