lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [OT] who are jteam ?
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2009 18:53:49 GMT
patrick o'leary wrote:
> Someone pulling an Al Gore (inventing the internet) on this isn't my
> concern, heck you can just google for some of the class names of
> locallucene and see how far spread it is, 
Then whats this about:

"

but it's giving significant, 'impression of ownership' of a lot of work
that's been completed
by other folks."

> what I am more concerned about
>
> "Future versions of these patches may include support for search with
> regular polygons, and the introduction of distance facets, allowing Solr
> users to be able to filter their results based on the calculated distances."
>
> They're now 'flogging' recent and current work I and others are doing?
>
> ... not encouraging, and certainly not healthy for open source.
>   
Doesn't sound that way to me.
> I'm going to be brash and request that there is commitment to adding a basic
> Spatial feature set for distance searching (restricted by distance) &
> sorting
> to Solr's trunk by the end of December. Iterate and refactor as needed after
> that.
>
> There should not be any more excuses to having this code out in the cold as
> patches and external projects.
>   
But your doing that yourself at source forge? Hasn't there been a lot of
work on an external LocalLucene, even after it was put into contrib?
While the
contrib version was left in a fairly hairy state?

Thats just the nature of the license - but putting LocalLucene into
contrib hasn't appeared to help much.
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Yonik Seeley wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:22 AM, patrick o'leary <pjaol@pjaol.com>
>>>       
>> wrote:
>>     
>>>> What spatial contributions have been contributed from this?
>>>> I'm only seeing some query parsing / multi-threading extensions, no
>>>>         
>> shapes /
>>     
>>>> SRID's etc
>>>> but it's giving significant, 'impression of ownership' of a lot of work
>>>> that's been completed
>>>> by other folks.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Looks like they acknowledge building on local solr and local lucene to
>>>       
>> me:
>>     
>>> """SSP started out its life as a patch for Solr Spatial Search
>>> (Solr-773) and Spatial Lucene (Lucene-1732) and extends Solr and
>>> Lucene with hereunto missing geodetic search functions (bounding boxes
>>> etc) while improving on the speed of the result and performance when
>>> dealing with a large data set through better query parsing and
>>> multi-threaded filtering. Also included are improved extensibility and
>>> documentation."""
>>>
>>> And in a way, they do "own" their plugin - their customizations,
>>> packaging, etc (note: I haven't looked at it).  And they offer support
>>> for it - which might be attractive to some companies that need
>>> supported geosearch now.
>>>
>>> It's also open source under the Apache license, so presumably we could
>>> borrow anything we want from it.
>>>
>>> -Yonik
>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>>>
>>>       
>> I think Patrick is obviously referring to: However, in the last 6 months
>> support for spatial search has begun to be added to Apache Lucene and
>> Solr, much of which has been developed here at JTeam.
>>
>> "Much of which" is obviously a bit of an overstatement (to a great
>> degree or extent) when you look at all the work thats been done.
>>
>> Oh well though. So it goes. Its Apache - they could package it all up,
>> hide the code under the covers, put a notice saying some work was
>> derived from Solr, call it Solr: geo search edition, and essentially
>> take even more credit while adding little to nothing. I wouldn't sweat it.
>>
>>     
>
>   


Mime
View raw message