Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-lucene-net-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 52945 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2011 19:15:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Jan 2011 19:15:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 60175 invoked by uid 500); 31 Dec 2010 21:28:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-lucene-net-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 60146 invoked by uid 500); 31 Dec 2010 21:28:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucene-net-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 60137 invoked by uid 99); 31 Dec 2010 21:28:52 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:28:52 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.85.215.48] (HELO mail-ew0-f48.google.com) (209.85.215.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 21:28:47 +0000 Received: by ewy20 with SMTP id 20so2372438ewy.35 for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 13:28:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.29.77 with SMTP id p13mr13766509ebc.2.1293830905176; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 13:28:25 -0800 (PST) Sender: mherndon@amptools.net Received: by 10.213.13.144 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 13:28:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 16:28:25 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: l3OuHIoi9HlcZtM-VAEgOpQnyAY Message-ID: Subject: Proposal Stage: Backwards Compatibility / Support From: Michael Herndon To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174c0c3e80a18e0498bb7bac --0015174c0c3e80a18e0498bb7bac Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 *Backwards Compatibility / Support: * This is definitely something we need to cover. I'm guessing the obvious choice would be to continue the 2.9.X versions under sharpen, maintain the current api thats has java idioms so that people can continue to use it, release patches, ensure stability with the current community. This would be important for people who have built products on top of lucene.net. The 3.0 version should probably match java in terms of breaking the api due to the language changes or maybe even a separate project inside: lucene.netredux (for lack of a better term at the moment). * * -- Michael Herndon --0015174c0c3e80a18e0498bb7bac--