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: If you could have one feature in Lucene...
Date Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:02:33 GMT
It's also not really the case that committers are mainly here to do work 
and push the project forward. It's an open source project - its up to 
the community to push the project as they see fit and have the time.

Committers are simply past contributers that have proven trustworthy and 
capable in the past - committers are here to commit code (not 
necessarily their own).

In an open source world, if you want something done, you do it yourself. 
Most committers have many other things going on at different points in 
time. This is the land of scratch your own itch most of the time - and 
once the itch is scratched, a committer will help you get the code 
commited. Some committers don't have the time to work with Lucene like 
they once did.

Some core committers have been off doing other things for some time now 
- others come and go. Some spend more time on Solr. Their time is not 
bound to Lucene in any way. Others spend an amazing amount of time on 
Lucene - it seems to me that Lucene has what appears to be 3 full time 
devs :) Uwe, Robert, and Michael are always hacking away at a frantic 
pace. They have done an amazing amount of work on the flex branch 
recently, a large move forward in the core code that will lead to many 
other large moves forward.

Committers come in all shapes and sizes. We should simply thank them for 
the time they put in and be happy with it. Lucene is developed by far 
more people than the committers - a committer is simply someone that has 
svn write access - anyone can (and many non committers do) drive Lucene 
core forward.

Not many are going to have the time and know how (and ridiculous genius) 
to match Mike McCandless' contributions. So it goes. If he is the bar 
for a committer, I quite.

-- 
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com



On 02/25/2010 06:37 PM, N. Hira wrote:
> I think it speaks to the maturity of the project ...  Lucene has 
> solved some of the easier problems in the problem space and the ones 
> that remain are ... difficult.
>
> I recently introduced Lucene/Nutch to a group of ~10 relatively 
> capable Java developers.  While they find it easy to use, they are 
> also learning that search/info. retrieval is a deceptively challenging 
> field.  From their "fresh" perspective, "this stuff [Lucene/Nutch] 
> really works well once you get it going, but you really have to know 
> what you are doing if you want to get the most from it".
>
> Building on Erik Hatcher's "try-it-out" mantra, it might be 
> interesting to see if contributions go up if we publicize specific 
> test cases to demonstrate/resolve the problems.
>
> -h
>
> On 25-Feb-2010, at 5:18 PM, Jason Rutherglen wrote:
>
>>> Who the heck is in charge here?
>>
>> Maybe it's Colonel Walter E. Kurtz?
>>
>> Intuitively perhaps people expect the committers to drive the project?
>>
>> When they don't see this are they less likely to contribute?
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> Hahaha - you have a sly humor.
>>>
>>> I totally agree though. Features are long overdo, and the committers 
>>> are
>>> lazy.
>>>
>>> I call for a cancellation of all of their paychecks and a stern warning
>>> about slacking off in Lucene land.
>>>
>>> There are dozens of features that are just taking way to long - 
>>> whatever
>>> happened to CSF? That feature is so 2006, and we still
>>> don't have it? I'm completely disturbed about the whole situation 
>>> myself.
>>>
>>> Who the heck is in charge here?
>>>
>>> On 02/25/2010 12:51 PM, Jason Rutherglen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It'd be great to see the Lucene committers (besides Michael
>>>> McCandless) work on the core of Lucene and push some of these long
>>>> overdue features to fruition?
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Grant Ingersoll<gsingers@apache.org>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What would it be?
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>





---------------------------------------------------------------------
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