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: pylucene-6.4.1: Missing/Can't unzip jars Under lucene-java-6.4.1 Directory
Date Fri, 17 Mar 2017 02:06:08 GMT

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017, Ruediger Meier wrote:

> On Thursday 16 March 2017, Andi Vajda wrote:
>
>> Indeed, this is a bug of mine.
>> What would you prefer:
>>    - include the actual .jar files in the distribution archive (tell
>> tar to follow the symlinks when I build the PyLucene distribution) -
>> or exclude the symlinks (tell tar to exclude symlinks); your running
>> build would then use ivy to fetch them
>
> Usually my opinion is that tarballs should have the least possible
> dependencies. But in this case where all the deps are hosted on the
> same source (apache.org) I would not include it but download on build
> time (if user has not downloaded it manually already).

+1, I'm leaning towards not including these .jar files as well.
It saves about 20Mb on the pylucene distribution tar file and they can be
obtained from ivy anyway.

> Maybe we could even enhance the Makefile to automatically find an
> already installed lucene or download the latest minor version. IMO it
> makes no sense that pylucene users by default always use a non-bugfixed
> outdated lucene. And I saw on this mailing list how difficult it can be
> to get enough votes for a pylucene minor update.

There is no such thing as a bugfixed Lucene. Each Lucene release has new bug 
fixes but also new bugs, such is software development. Lucene also breaks 
things on a regular basis inspite of being quite careful about backwards 
compatibility, thus PyLucene unit tests have to be checked for each release.

The problem you're referring to would not be much of an issue if it was 
easier to garner votes for a PyLucene release. A new release would happen in 
lock step with each Lucene release, as was the case in the past, a few years 
ago. There is a Lucene 6.5 release being talked about and I intend to 
release a PyLucene 6.5 shortly thereafter.

> The same goes for the jcc python package which the user has to install
> manually anyways. We don't need to ship it with pylucene. I guess jcc
> would be far more famous if it would be hosted decoupled of pylucene.
> IMO jcc is a really amazing good working thing. pylucene is just a nice
> example how easy you can use java libs via python.

Thank you for the kind words. JCC is already available without PyLucene from 
Python's PyPI: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/JCC/2.23
JCC gets released on PyPI at the same time as the main Apache PyLucene release.

I agree that PyLucene is just an example of JCC usage but it's the main one 
and PyLucene has been driving the features of JCC.

Andi..

>
> cheers,
> Rudi
>

Mime
View raw message