You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-user@lucene.apache.org by Jeff Rodenburg <je...@gmail.com> on 2005/09/11 21:52:50 UTC
Version 1.9
Is there a consensus or estimate on when v1.9 will be considered a stable
release? I'm prepping a deployment on v1.4.3 but would like an idea of when
1.9 might be considered stable in the eyes of the community.
-- Jeff Rodenburg
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Barry Hawkins <ba...@bytemason.org>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
John Haxby wrote:
> John Haxby wrote:
>
>> [...] compiled with gcj that I believe is compiled with gcj [...]
>
>
> It's only compiled once with gcj, if at all :-)
>
> You can get it from
> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/4/SRPMS/lucene-1.4.3-1jpp_3fc.src.rpm
>
>
> A quick inspection of the .spec file suggests that it's compiled with
> gcj and, indeed, the compiled RPM
> (http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/4/i386/lucene-1.4.3-1jpp_3fc.i386.rpm)
> has both shared libraries and a jar.
>
> jch
[...]
Hi guys, I am the co-maintainer of the Lucene package for Debian
with Jeff B. We have been working on getting Lucene to build completely
with a free runtime for quite a while, as Jeff had mentioned. The
principle challenge was the single RMI class
org.apache.lucene.search.RemoteSearchable. RMI compilation has only
recently made progress in GNU Classpath and subsequently in the other
free runtimes for Java besides GCJ that use it.
As you can see in the source RPM referenced above, patch
lucene-bz133180.patch disables the compilation of RemoteShareable. The
Fedora team simply removes the class in order to package Lucene using GCJ.
We have been using Kaffe in our work to get Lucene packaged via a
free runtime. Kaffe has its own GNU Classpath library copy. As of this
weekend, we got RemoteSearchable to compile and pass its 4 unit tests
using Kaffe's RMI compiling facilities (from GNU Classpath). We have
been running Lucene's entire unit test suite as part of our build.
One additional expediency employed in the RPM is that the unit test
suite is foregone until the RMI issue is resolved, as it states in their
changelog:
- - Add patch for rmic (rh#133180 -- gbenson). Should be fixed by
forthcoming grmic patch.
- - Don't run tests until we get a patched grmic (all pass except those
needing stubs).
We communicate with the Fedora and GNU Classpath people on a pretty
regular basis via IRC, and for now they are watching us to see if we get
this stuff figured out. ;-) Our current roadblock is that the unit test
for org.apache.lucene.analysis.ru.RussianStem pukes and fails; you can
see the output in Debian Bug Report #272295[0].
[0] - http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=272295
Regards,
- --
Barry Hawkins
site: www.bytemason.org
weblog: www.yepthatsme.com
Registered Linux User #368650
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDLyHVHuKcDICy0QoRAniXAKDrK4K7AkEinyjiNChkFaadyY5ZOQCgqgzm
pp5+62j61/wFl4gx7Fq4Meg=
=Yr0k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by John Haxby <jc...@scalix.com>.
John Haxby wrote:
> [...] compiled with gcj that I believe is compiled with gcj [...]
It's only compiled once with gcj, if at all :-)
You can get it from
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/4/SRPMS/lucene-1.4.3-1jpp_3fc.src.rpm
A quick inspection of the .spec file suggests that it's compiled with
gcj and, indeed, the compiled RPM
(http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/4/i386/lucene-1.4.3-1jpp_3fc.i386.rpm)
has both shared libraries and a jar.
jch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Ray Tsang <sa...@gmail.com>.
i'm willing to help out
On 9/13/05, Scott Ganyo <sc...@ganyo.com> wrote:
> What is required to make the release?
>
> On Sep 12, 2005, at 3:39 PM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sep 12, 2005, at 1:55 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> >
> >> Erik Hatcher wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I'm using the trunk of Subversion (pretty much what 1.9 will be)
> >>> on all my projects and it is quite stable. I defer to the
> >>> others on when we release it as 1.9 officially, though.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> I think the 1.9 release should be made soon. What is required is
> >> a motivated committer with time to lead the process. I won't have
> >> time until at least next month. Would someone else like to
> >> volunteer to make this release happen?
> >>
> >
> > Among several other things, I'm currently taking a demanding
> > University course (every weekday, a couple of hours homework /
> > night). I could volunteer to work on a release over Thanksgiving
> > or Xmas breaks :)
> >
> > Erik
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
On Sep 18, 2005, at 3:41 AM, Jeff Breidenbach wrote:
> 1) Does it make sense for Linux distributions to ship
> Lucene 1.9, or simply wait for 2.0? (I'm thinking 2.0...)
1.9 deprecates a lot of API, and 2.0 will be the same version with
all the deprecated stuff removed. So if folks jump straight from
1.4.3 to 2.0 they may be frustrated when their applications do not
compile. Our recommendation is for developers to first compile
cleanly with 1.9, then migrate to 2.0.
Perhaps Linux should ship with both 1.9 and 2.0?
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by DM Smith <dm...@gmail.com>.
On 9/18/05, Jeff Breidenbach <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Putting on my Debian maintainer hat:
>
> 1) Does it make sense for Linux distributions to ship
> Lucene 1.9, or simply wait for 2.0? (I'm thinking 2.0...)
I think it should include what is available. If pre-2.0, it should be 1.4.3and
1.9. If post 2.0, then 1.4.3 and 2.0, possibly 1.9. I don't think it would
be good to presume that software has upgraded from 1.4.3 to 2.0, at least
for a while.
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by John Haxby <jc...@scalix.com>.
Jeff Breidenbach wrote:
>2) Is anyone testing against kaffe or other non-sun compilers?
>This is important to Debian as any software that can only
>be built from a closed-source JDK is considered
>a second class citizen. As you can see, we've been poking
>at this issue on Lucene 1.4.3 for quite some time [1]
>and it is tricky. Support from upstream is always appreciated.
>
>
I don't know much about it, but Fedora Core 4 ships a version of Lucene
compiled with gcj that I believe is compiled with gcj. It'd be easy
enough to see what they do in the .src.rpm though and as Debian
maintainer I'm sure you're well versed in getting ideas from other builds!
jch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Jeff Breidenbach <br...@gmail.com>.
Putting on my Debian maintainer hat:
1) Does it make sense for Linux distributions to ship
Lucene 1.9, or simply wait for 2.0? (I'm thinking 2.0...)
2) Is anyone testing against kaffe or other non-sun compilers?
This is important to Debian as any software that can only
be built from a closed-source JDK is considered
a second class citizen. As you can see, we've been poking
at this issue on Lucene 1.4.3 for quite some time [1]
and it is tricky. Support from upstream is always appreciated.
Cheers,
Jeff
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=272295
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Scott Ganyo wrote:
> What is required to make the release?
The (somewhat dated) steps are at:
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-lucene/ReleaseTodo
Probably the first thing to do is to update these (cvs -> svn) and see
if folks suggest any other improvements.
We should start with a 1.9-rc1 release. Once we have a 1.9-rcX release
that is problem-free then we'll make a 1.9-final release.
Sometime after the 1.9-final release is out then we need can remove
deprecated code and create a 2.0-rc1 release.
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Scott Ganyo <sc...@ganyo.com>.
What is required to make the release?
On Sep 12, 2005, at 3:39 PM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
>
> On Sep 12, 2005, at 1:55 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
>
>> Erik Hatcher wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'm using the trunk of Subversion (pretty much what 1.9 will be)
>>> on all my projects and it is quite stable. I defer to the
>>> others on when we release it as 1.9 officially, though.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think the 1.9 release should be made soon. What is required is
>> a motivated committer with time to lead the process. I won't have
>> time until at least next month. Would someone else like to
>> volunteer to make this release happen?
>>
>
> Among several other things, I'm currently taking a demanding
> University course (every weekday, a couple of hours homework /
> night). I could volunteer to work on a release over Thanksgiving
> or Xmas breaks :)
>
> Erik
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
On Sep 12, 2005, at 1:55 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> Erik Hatcher wrote:
>
>> I'm using the trunk of Subversion (pretty much what 1.9 will be)
>> on all my projects and it is quite stable. I defer to the others
>> on when we release it as 1.9 officially, though.
>>
>
> I think the 1.9 release should be made soon. What is required is a
> motivated committer with time to lead the process. I won't have
> time until at least next month. Would someone else like to
> volunteer to make this release happen?
Among several other things, I'm currently taking a demanding
University course (every weekday, a couple of hours homework /
night). I could volunteer to work on a release over Thanksgiving or
Xmas breaks :)
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Erik Hatcher wrote:
> I'm using the trunk of Subversion (pretty much what 1.9 will be) on all
> my projects and it is quite stable. I defer to the others on when we
> release it as 1.9 officially, though.
I think the 1.9 release should be made soon. What is required is a
motivated committer with time to lead the process. I won't have time
until at least next month. Would someone else like to volunteer to make
this release happen?
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Version 1.9
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
I'm using the trunk of Subversion (pretty much what 1.9 will be) on
all my projects and it is quite stable. I defer to the others on
when we release it as 1.9 officially, though.
I recommend to you, and others that can, to use the trunk codebase in
your projects. It will ensure that it gets hammered more and any
issues ironed out (though it is unlikely you'll encounter any, no
more so than you would with 1.4.3).
Erik
On Sep 11, 2005, at 3:52 PM, Jeff Rodenburg wrote:
> Is there a consensus or estimate on when v1.9 will be considered a
> stable
> release? I'm prepping a deployment on v1.4.3 but would like an idea
> of when
> 1.9 might be considered stable in the eyes of the community.
>
> -- Jeff Rodenburg
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org