lucene-pylucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Installing PyLucene
Date Thu, 26 Jan 2017 23:03:47 GMT

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, Andi Vajda wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, Jan HC8ydahl wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> 
>>> I hope you didn?t get this wrong! We all appreciate the existence of 
>>> JCC/PyLucene and especially all the effort you?ve put into this.
>> 
>> 
>> PyLucene is driven by its own community, and user involvement and 
>> contributions is a must.
>> The (sub)project will survive only to the extent that its current users 
>> invest in it.
>> 
>>> So if some funding is required to get this going ?
>> 
>> For an ASF Open Source Project, the only thing that is required to get 
>> going is user/developer
>> involvement and teamwork. While Andi started the project due to needs at 
>> the time, and became
>> a committer, he is no longer an active user, so perhaps time has come for 
>> other users to step ut and take
>> responsibility.
>> 
>> How ?funding? would look like in the Python3 case is not so much sending 
>> money to the ASF,
>> but more for individual companies like your own, to sponsor (through 
>> developer time) the major
>> work on the patch, and driving it through to completion. Hopefully other 
>> users will contribute along
>> the way too.
>> 
>> You will of course need help from experienced developers, but the ideal 
>> situation is that after
>> a couple of such patches that get committed, you (or the developer working 
>> on the code) will be nominated
>> as committer and can continue developing PyLucene without the need for Andi 
>> or any other one individual.
>> 
>>> There has been some discussions about the future of PyLucene on this list 
>>> but I still didn't see any conclusion/decision
>> 
>> 
>> The discussion sparked some new development and a release, which is a 
>> success. So the decission I guess is to keep PyLucene alive and try to 
>> strengthen the community.
>> As long as the project continues to produce releases, it is (somewhat) 
>> alive.
>> If on the other hand another year or two goes by without another release, 
>> I?m sure the PMC will take action again.
>
> I intend to produce a PyLucene 6.4 release once Lucene 6.4 is done.
> It's been a few months now...

Lucene 6.4.0 was released on Monday. I did a quick test build of PyLucene 
with that code and it required no changes at all. Given that a Lucene 6.4.1 
bugfix release is around the corner, I'll wait until it is released to send 
a PyLucene 6.4.1 release candidate for vote.

Andi..

>
> Andi..
>
>> 
>> --
>> Jan HC8ydahl, search solution architect
>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>> 
>>> 6. jan. 2017 kl. 10.34 skrev Thomas Koch <koch@orbiteam.de>:
>>> 
>>> Dear Andi,
>>> 
>>> I?ve just sent the link to the public gist with the patch to Petrus and 
>>> this list. As mentioned by Oliver we?d be more than happy if a core 
>>> developer of JCC/PyLucene could review the patch and decide what to do 
>>> with it. It has been developed without intimate knowledge of JCC with the 
>>> goal to make PyLucene(36) usable with Python3. It may have some issues or 
>>> need improvements (also cf. "IMPORTANT NOTES" in my last email about 
>>> current limitations of the patch). That?s where export review (and effort) 
>>> is needed.
>>> 
>>> For the future of course a port to newer versions of JCC/PyLucene would be 
>>> more than valuable. I think what Oliver wanted to express is that we don?t 
>>> have that much deep know how of JCC and can thus can only provide initial 
>>> efforts and contributions, but for production/release ready code an export 
>>> review is still needed. Also we haven?t watched the development of newer 
>>> versions of PyLucene as we?re still stuck with PyLucene36.
>>> 
>>> I hope you didn?t get this wrong! We all appreciate the existence of 
>>> JCC/PyLucene and especially all the effort you?ve put into this.
>>> 
>>> However, I fear that Python 3 support is a must-have for a Python tool or 
>>> library that's available today:
>>> - Python3 is here to stay! (py3.6 has just been released)
>>> - Most of the popular Python packages do meanwhile provide Python3 support 
>>> - cf. http://py3readiness.org <http://py3readiness.org/>
>>> - Python2 support will end by 2020 (sounds far away but isn't - cf. 
>>> https://pythonclock.org <https://pythonclock.org/> )
>>> 
>>> There has been some discussions about the future of PyLucene on this list 
>>> but I still didn't see any conclusion/decision. Without a transparent 
>>> roadmap and ongoing development (i.e. new releases, Python3 support etc.) 
>>> the usage of JCC/PyLucene is most likely unattractive for developers who 
>>> start a new project and this is where the user base shrinks and further 
>>> contributions are stalled (somehow a chicken-egg-problem).
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure how far the ASF may help here, but I've read that the Python 
>>> Software Foundation occasionally funds projects to port libraries that are 
>>> widely used but don't have enough of a community to do a port.
>>> cf. 
>>> https://developers.slashdot.org/story/13/08/25/2115204/interviews-guido-van-rossum-answers-your-questions

>>> <https://developers.slashdot.org/story/13/08/25/2115204/interviews-guido-van-rossum-answers-your-questions>
>>> 
>>> So if some funding is required to get this going ...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> best regards,
>>> 
>>> Thomas
>>> ?
>>>> Am 04.01.2017 um 19:41 schrieb Andi Vajda <vajda@apache.org>:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Note that PyLucene currently lacks official Python3 support!
>>>>> We've done a port of PyLucene 3.6 (!) to support Python3 and offered
the 
>>>>> patches needed to JCC and PyLucene for use/review on the list - but 
>>>>> didn't get any feedback so far.
>>>>> cf. 
>>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org/msg02167.html

>>>>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org/msg02167.html>

>>>>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org/msg02167.html

>>>>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org/msg02167.html>>
>>>> 
>>>> Indeed, re-reading this thread, I remember now. There is no patch 
>>>> attached and the tone of the contribution offer is a little off putting.

>>>> It comes across more as a one time abandon-ware contribution as something

>>>> with authors standing behind ready to respond to code review comments. I

>>>> have a similar python 3 jcc patch sitting in an svn branch that could be

>>>> revived. I've stated in the past that I intended to do so but lacked 
>>>> time. Interest in a Python 3 jcc has been scant so I haven't put much 
>>>> priority into this task.
>>>> 
>>>> Andi..
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>

Mime
View raw message