From user-return-4384-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@lucenenet.apache.org Thu Jun 21 10:41:16 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B28D18062B for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:41:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 66986 invoked by uid 500); 21 Jun 2018 08:41:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@lucenenet.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@lucenenet.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@lucenenet.apache.org Received: (qmail 66965 invoked by uid 99); 21 Jun 2018 08:41:13 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:41:13 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 499BAC0040 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:41:13 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.075 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.075 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.105, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd4-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cnblogs-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a3Fb9cPQFD-x for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:41:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 7D4CD5F27B for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:41:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id l15-v6so2281787wmc.1 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 01:41:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cnblogs-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=eUXH+xdKRxR8kzUVaqPceslTQj5zEtAqR+Me4zBrQ1U=; b=mvz1C2GL2zMkShPC4C2anEu/pCpMirtIH8EeSYwhhbVm4TvDVamX1EVWqzvfypFB33 Qd6gXKscvtghoc8tKAbGi3lJbMUfZUd5uMr+64IXc+ZI286f2SdvXusIh31G3SESHfu9 yjyO3lHD6q4tKUV6Wi7OypOEeE5q8kPh+ol4mDpZset4riTP43uRTyqAM0lRzmY9IXsd qzKjC+K9KBoehElxgoj2hlDozJYVG5QUXPq8xSaVosuGk72hAHRjRmM6k2/l8K/oKOx3 97n514+cRukmKVz7w01z1xJZYeqBOqW5APEWneXFsWocjqLLxQmrYAarMSVvgnvXd3A+ 0b/w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=eUXH+xdKRxR8kzUVaqPceslTQj5zEtAqR+Me4zBrQ1U=; b=gugje3OdTrXcgs8pNo6wjf6YD+Mg0omnJhb09WGgQHZ/TSHq7Yp1SEilla2iLLzzdt hFb5Rehg+8w1exp23LdG1Jv6WA5Kv92GjxsUfJoaYXKBZVrP5+f4+SgsnanH34YTvLMm Tnr/R4ddPvHKBTqXaUaAzZoYmJ4OQDcA0kSug9VogaDmh2rDSJxVBY15SqPmhTDuzNRG nOj9XOg48mcFNL4RVBz2+NdoOxBHhuFYF6141h3uPLEILK9sAz4V/n33J3w/f0tv3N2N V4mSnMEQ0+KCWxHgSCHP767fvaAwSrBFOxTjqy5caqkh0e2YJBwv2aVUBN6Ip7YuwksL nVfw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2fbRrfI9JahnVq6mzi8Gdc13L4vodXns9WNcKDgHQ1kMiZm99P 9fDRKzkLtSpzBvZQJZWa5nqQZGgL6vZiYVxCWy9r9ats X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKK6dknM4tuKPjY/aBvRxoYmhcKJlFE9OY+2dr8cx0u3UQL9RFkUMpwcugzq7cTFQVensWJH6QVNcQGkIN2a+mk= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:3bc4:: with SMTP id i187-v6mr4509882wma.57.1529570469684; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 01:41:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a5d:4649:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 01:41:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87y3f8d07z.fsf@v45346.1blu.de> References: <87vab7pyr7.fsf@v45346.1blu.de> <458A3CD4F362D144B999930AAADEBAAD2F839A94@EX10DAG10-N1> <458A3CD4F362D144B999930AAADEBAAD2F839D11@EX10DAG10-N1> <87y3f8d07z.fsf@v45346.1blu.de> From: =?UTF-8?B?5bCP5bq3?= Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 16:41:09 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: State / Future of the Lucene.Net Project To: user@lucenenet.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008138f4056f22e08d" --0000000000008138f4056f22e08d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, I think I need to do some preparation. I will try do this job in my free time and I have confidence to do it. Will I contact with you in this way in the future? 2018-06-21 16:15 GMT+08:00 Stefan Bodewig : > On 2018-06-21, Shad Storhaug wrote: > > > There are still many undecided issues regarding the ICU functionality. > For example: > > > 1. Should we use the newly ported ICU4N (https://github.com/ > NightOwl888/ICU4N) project or try to add the functionality to the already > existing icu.net project (https://github.com/sillsdev/icu-dotnet)? Note > the latter has been attempted, but there are several issues (missing > functionality, incompatibilities, problems loading data) that make it very > challenging to provide all of the Lucene.Net.ICU functionality - it was > easier to get it working by porting from ICU4J, but will require > maintaining the ICU4N project. > > 2. If we use ICU4N, should we make it into a general library that > benefits all of the .NET ecosystem, or should we limit it to primarily > support Lucene.NET? > > I'm not doing any of the work, so take this with a big grain of salt. > > Right now I'd focus on what is best for Lucene.Net and try to safe the > (.NET) world later. To me it looks as if going with ICU4N in its current > state is the best short term option. If you want to turn ICU4N into > something useful then this sounds (1) very useful and (2) like a lot of > work. Most likely the people who'd want to contribute to ICU4N and > Lucene.Net are not the same (apart from yourself), so I'd separate > growing ICU4N from which version of ICU4N Lucene.Net should use. We can > probably switch to a more full-blown version of ICU4N if/when such a > beast eists. Most probably I'm missing something. > > > Basically, there are 3 ways to complete this: > > > 1. Add the required functionality to the icu.net project in order to > support the Lucene.Net.ICU features, port the missing Lucene.Net.ICU > features to the current master branch and abandon work on ICU4N. > > 2. Finish up the API and fix 19 failing tests to make ICU4N good enough > to support Lucene.Net.ICU without making it into a first-rate component > that supports all ICU features. > > 3. Contact the ICU team about contributing ICU4N to their repository and > if they agree, allow them to lead the direction of the API and features > (with the added possibility of their help and Unicode expertise). > > I'd opt for 2 - and 3 after 2 is done. But see the disclaimer above. > > Stefan > --0000000000008138f4056f22e08d--