lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Pugh <>
Subject Re: archive solrjs and point to AJAX Solr?
Date Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:57:11 GMT
So one thing that I think is key to minimizing confusion is to write  
up some sort of "State of the JavaScript Clients" section on the Solr  
wiki.  Either as part of this page: 
SolrJS, or create a  
page.  And try and get everyone (, AjaxSolr) to point to  
it as the master "status" page for all the libraries.  Otherwise we  
may continue to see rampant confusion among all the JS libraries.

I always found the various widgets for jQuery quite confusing because  
some are hosted on, while others are called things like  
"jQuery Calender Widget", but aren't official jQuery widgets!

If we want to do this, I'll volunteer to take a crack at the State of  
the Javascript Clients page, and lay it out in a way that lists pros/ 
cons/status, so that as other libraries are created, others can fill  
it out.  Think somewhat like the CI Feature Matrix page (



On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:59 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:

> On Oct 7, 2009, at 7:04 PM, James McKinney wrote:
>> I've just now changed the licensing of AJAX Solr to just be ASL, as
>> tri-licensing was confusing.
>> If I were to distribute the code on, it would have to be  
>> GPL, but
>> prohibits distribution of code that is available  
>> elsewhere, so I
>> can't distribute it there, and so don't need to make it GPL after  
>> all.
> So, we've come full circle...  At any rate, good luck!
>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Grant Ingersoll  
>> <> wrote:
>>> Doing this effectively means it isn't likely to ever come back to  
>>> Solr.  If
>>> it did, it would likely have to go through Software Grant/ 
>>> Incubation, since
>>> they are allowing people to contribute pretty freely via git.  I  
>>> personally
>>> don't care either way, but people should be aware of the  
>>> implications.
>>> I also personally don't know what it means to have something be  
>>> licensed 3
>>> different ways.  Why not just make it public domain?  I was under  
>>> the
>>> impression GNU doesn't think the ASL is compatible, but maybe that  
>>> has
>>> changed.  At any rate, I don't want to start a licensing debate.
>>> So, if the two people responsible for putting the code in (Ryan and
>>> Matthias) are +1, then so am I.  I personally don't see myself  
>>> ever working
>>> to maintain it, but who knows.
>>> -Grant
>>> On Oct 7, 2009, at 1:24 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
>>> I don't think solrjs should hold up the 1.4 release.
>>>> Since this issue was last discussed, James McKinney has licensed  
>>>> AJAX Solr
>>>> (a solrjs fork) under Apache & MIT
>>>> It seems like this has good support and gets the on-going  
>>>> attention it
>>>> deserves.
>>>> I suggest we archive solrjs -- remove it from the 1.4 release --  
>>>> and point
>>>> javascript client lovers to AJAX-Solr.
>>>> If we do "archive" solrjs, what do you think the best method is?
>>>> 1. svn copy it to /sandbox?
>>>> 2. make a zip and place it on an external site, remove it  
>>>> entirely from
>>>> solr svn
>>>> I lean towards option 1.
>>>> thoughts
>>>> ryan
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll
> Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids)  
> using Solr/Lucene:

Eric Pugh | Principal | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 434.466.1467 |
Co-Author: Solr 1.4 Enterprise Search Server available from

View raw message