lucene-ruby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <e...@ehatchersolutions.com>
Subject Re: solrb/flare in action?
Date Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:30:43 GMT

On Feb 13, 2007, at 2:51 AM, Coda Hale wrote:
> We're on the *verge* of deploying the first round of user-facing Solr
> functionality at my work (using solrb), and it's amazing. Almost a
> million records and we can still run stupid-complicated queries ("find
> me anything with at least 4 of these 10 tags") in milliseconds. solrb
> is *really* working well, especially since it's so light-weight.

Fantastic!

> Some changes I'd like to see (and will be willing to help out with):
> * gem packaging and distribution on rubyforge (along with a quick
> release schedule)

I personally am currently -0 to -1 on releasing solrb at rubyforge.   
I know its the "Ruby Way", but we're at Apache and I'd like to do  
this the "Apache Way".  Making releases available elsewhere is  
frowned upon.

I have no objections, for the time being, to us checking in packages  
(.gem/.tar/etc) under the pkg directory as "release candidates" and  
allowing folks to "gem install -source ... " them.  I think the  
additional -source switch gives Ed heartburn, though I really want to  
make sure we do this the Apache way as much as possible.

I can set up nightly builds and test runs and publish nightly  
packages too if we want.

Ideally solrb will stay lock-step with Solr releases so you can  
always rely on a particular solrb version to work with a particular  
Solr version.

> * add XML parsing capability to libxml-ruby code

She's all yours, Coda :)

> * better documentation, both on the method level and on the  
> integration level

My bad.  I was just reading the rdoc documentation in the Pickaxe  
book.  We can all chip in on this, but I'll take a stab in the near  
future at improving this myself.

> * more modular request/response design

Something I'd love to see also.  I think the request and response  
code doesn't need to be so separate.

> * better security -- make sure Solr gets passed sanitary data

Care to elaborate on this?

> * query builder DSL?

Query Builder *UI* is what I'm after.

> I'm sure once we roll out more functionality based on solrb I'll have
> a lot more ideas.

Thanks Coda!

	Erik


Mime
View raw message