lucene-lucene-net-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "xzxz@mail.ru" <x...@mail.ru>
Subject Re: Lucene.Net 2.3.1 Candidate
Date Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:16:30 GMT
I think it is good idea.

Andrei

Doug Sale ?????:
> I would like to suggest that we make the next release candidate 2.3.2 (not
> 2.3.1).  I have made all patches for this code available on the list and
> they satisfy all the unit tests.  Additionally, the Lucene 2.3.2 release is
> only a bug-fix release, not a feature release (see
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_2_3_2/CHANGES.txt).
>
> Since there exists a gap in the releases of Lucene.Net (as compared to those
> of Lucene), continuity is no reason to release a 2.3.1 version.  In fact,
> separate releases of 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 will result in more work, when users
> will only want the 2.3.2 release.
>
> Here is a link to my orignal post with the 2.3.2 patch:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-lucene-net-dev/200810.mbox/%3C8e3fbf150810161402tb68e1edyabf6e669484e3902@mail.gmail.com%3E
>
> Please comment.
>
> Thanks,
> Doug
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 8:01 PM, George Aroush <george@aroush.net> wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>> I strongly suggest that 2.3.1 be stabilized first and be formally release
>> (or at least be prompted to RC (release candidate) status) before you bring
>> in 2.3.2 code base.  Since Lucene.Net is still in incubation, there is a
>> formal process to make a release -- search the Lucene.Net mailing list or
>> ASF website to find out more.  Making a release is an important part and a
>> required process toward a graduation from incubation; it's important that
>> you and DIGY experience a formal release process.
>>
>> Once 2.3.1 is in at least RC status, and the community has tested it
>> without
>> issues, then what need to happen is a copy of 2.3.1 code is made from the
>> "trunc" to "tags" repository (i.e.: "svn copy".)  Once this happens, then
>> the "trunc" becomes 2.3.2.
>>
>> So, in a nutshell, before you can check-in your 2.3.2 work, it's important
>> to get the current version into RC status.  For this to happen, the points
>> I
>> highlighted to DIGY must be meet.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -- George
>>
>>
>>     
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Doug Sale [mailto:dougsale@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:56 AM
>>> To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Lucene.Net 2.3.1 Candidate
>>>
>>> I would like to put together the 2.3.1 release candidate
>>> ASAP, as I'm currently sitting on the code that is the 2.3.2
>>> port.  From a repository perspective, what is the protocol
>>> for tagging releases?
>>>
>>> (Also, thanks to DIGY for executing the tedious process of
>>> committing the
>>> 2.3.1 patches and closing out the JIRA issues.)
>>>
>>> -Doug
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Digy <digydigy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> I didn't know "release candidate" has so formal meaning.
>>>>         
>>> Let's name it
>>>       
>>>> "mature version" for now.
>>>>
>>>> DIGY.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: George Aroush [mailto:george@aroush.net]
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 4:18 AM
>>>> To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Subject: RE: Lucene.Net 2.3.1 Candidate
>>>>
>>>> Hi DIGY,
>>>>
>>>> Few more things are needed before the SVN trunk can be promoted to
>>>> release candidate, those are:
>>>>
>>>> 1) All AssemblyInfo.cs in /trunck/C#/src/ should have the same
>>>> assembly version.
>>>> 2) /trunck/C#/src/HISTORY.txt file need to reflect what has been
>>>> fixed, show the build version and that this is a RC (release
>>>> candidate) (change it to "final" when it becomes a release)
>>>>
>>>> After those changes, the community should start using the code off
>>>> this trunk and if there is no issue for, lets say a month,
>>>>         
>>> a vote for
>>>       
>>>> release should be called.
>>>>
>>>> One of the tests that I have always done before I nominate
>>>>         
>>> a build for
>>>       
>>>> RC is verify that the index works with Java Lucene; you should take
>>>> the time and do some basic test on this area too.  Have the
>>>>         
>>> same index
>>>       
>>>> be modified by Java Lucene and then by Lucene.Net.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> -- George
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Digy [mailto:digydigy@gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 10:03 AM
>>>>> To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: RE: Lucene.Net 2.3.1 Candidate
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All waiting patches to make Nunit tests pass
>>>>> (+LUCENENET-159) are applied.
>>>>>
>>>>> Release candidate for Lucene.Net.2.3.1 is in svn trunk now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> DIGY
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Doug Sale [mailto:dougsale@gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 12:08 AM
>>>>> To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Lucene.Net 2.3.1 Candidate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe we have a candidate for the Lucene.Net 2.3.1
>>>>>           
>>> release.  It
>>>       
>>>>> diverges from the SVN HEAD by the list of patches below.
>>>>>
>>>>> LUCENENET-135 SupportClass.patch
>>>>> LUCENENET-143 TestStressIndexing2.patch, FieldsReader.patch
>>>>> LUCENENET-145 DocumentsWriter.patch
>>>>> LUCENENET-146 SegmentTermPositionVector.
>>>>>
>>>>> patch
>>>>> LUCENENET-151 MultiPhraseQuery.patch
>>>>>
>>>>> LUCENENET-152 SegmentInfos.patch, FSDirectory.patch
>>>>>
>>>>> LUCENENET-154 TestIndexWriterLockRelease.patch
>>>>> LUCENENET-155 SetUp.patch
>>>>> LUCENENET-157 GetFieldNames.patch
>>>>> LUCENENET-158 CheckHits.patch
>>>>>
>>>>> I have attached a comprehensive patch to simplify things
>>>>>           
>>> for those
>>>       
>>>>> of you who would like to try it out.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Get the latest from SVN HEAD (currently revision 702987)
>>>>> 2) Apply Comprehensive.patch from the root directory.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Doug
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>         
>>     
>
>   


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message