You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com> on 2010/05/20 00:57:28 UTC

Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi all,
 
Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for the
CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
 
CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely for a
few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who like to use
Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the overheads of using a
JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users of various high-level or
scripting languages.
 
We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms to Java
Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository works with 2.3.2
indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More info is available in
our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
(https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
 
CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 licenses
(dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help to do that
correctly.
 
Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our end.
This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene
community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
 
Itamar.

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 03:05:43AM +0400, Earwin Burrfoot wrote:
> I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?

They aren't related projects.  C and C++ are different languages, as C
partisans like Linus Torvalds will tell you:

    http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/57643/focus=57918

I haven't followed CLucene closely enough to have an opinion about bringing it
into the Apache Lucene fold, but I don't think the existence of Lucy should
have any bearing.

> Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?

Dunno, haven't looked closely at Sphinx.  That seems more like a userland
issue, unless you're proposing bringing in Sphinx as a Lucene subproject. ;) 

Marvin Humphrey


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Grant,

Thanks for your reply, and for the PMC on their time.

I understand your reasoning. We hoped becoming a Lucene sub-project will
bring us more attention. Being a TLP may miss that goal, although being an
ASF TLP definitely has benefits of its own.

We will discuss this internally and resume from there.

Thanks again.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant Ingersoll
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 5:27 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

Sorry for the delay, the holiday weekend snuck up on me sooner than I
thought it would. 

The consensus on CLucene is that it should go through incubation with the
idea of becoming a TLP on its own, if it wishes to be a part of the ASF.
The primary reason for this is the ASF tries to focus TLPs on a particular
community with a particular set of goals/committers/contributors and to not
overlap them with other communities that may have different goals.  On the
surface it would seem CLucene has some overlap (same name, same file
format), but it is pretty clear the overlap stops there in terms of the
actual users, contributors, code repositories, committers, etc.  (And yes,
this is true, to some extent except for the fact that they are mostly
auto-generated, for the other ports here as well and that is something we
are evaluating).  If you're still interested in being a part of the ASF, I'd
put together and present your proposal over on general@incubator.apache.org.
Before you go into incubation, you may wish to read up a bit more on the ASF
and how projects are expected to run, as it may be different from what you
are used to vis-a-vis running a project on Source Forge.  See
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html for more information, as
well as http://incubator.apache.org.

-Grant


On May 31, 2010, at 5:49 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Have the PMC came to a decision on this?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Itamar. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant 
> Ingersoll
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:30 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
> 
> Hi Itamar,
> 
> The PMC is discussing this internally.   It is pretty clear at this point
> that CLucene needs to go through Incubation, so by all means start the 
> process there (see http://incubator.apache.org).  Also, keep in mind, 
> that many things have changed for Lucene in regards to subprojects in 
> recent months, so despite the fact that we have other "ports" under 
> Lucene right now due to legacy reasons, it doesn't imply that adding 
> another would be good for this particular TLP.  That isn't to say that 
> CLucene doesn't have a place at the ASF.  Generally speaking, the ASF does
not want "umbrella"
> projects covering disjoint communities b/c it often leads to 
> unnecessary bureaucratic problems at the PMC level related to things 
> like voting, releases, project direction, etc.
> 
> At any rate, we should be wrapping up our PMC discussion by tomorrow, 
> so I will update this thread at that time.
> 
> Thanks,
> Grant
> 
> On May 26, 2010, at 7:36 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:
> 
>> Earwin,
>> 
>> Considering the fact that Lucy is not planning on complementing 
>> Lucene's API, while CLucene's goal is to be a one-by-one port, I 
>> would say no relationship. Also, CLucene is written in C++ and not C.
>> 
>> Re. Sphinx - I'm not familiar enough with it to really comment on 
>> this, but I'd assume this is more of a Lucene vs Sphinx question. Do 
>> the prons and cons, throw in some benchmarks, and then give CLucene a 
>> couple of extra points for being cross-platform, and 5-10 times 
>> faster than the equivallent Lucene version. I had a quick look, and 
>> it seems like Lucene is much more scalable (esp. considering the 
>> latest
>> developments) and some even claim that "Lucene performance is unmatched".
>> 
>> Also, unless a restrictive license isn't a show stopper for you, 
>> Sphinx is released under GPL.
>> 
>> Itamar. 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Earwin Burrfoot [mailto:earwin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:06 AM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>> 
>> I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
>> Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?
>> 
>> 2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
>>> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the 
>>> same this is what we'll be doing.
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure 
>>> where this is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this 
>>> from being discussed, do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone 
>>> with good knowledge of this process could respond and help us move 
>>> this forward. I can be contacted privately if needed.
>>> 
>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>> 
>>> Thanks Itamar-
>>> 
>>> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as 
>>> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be 
>>> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then 
>>> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own 
>>> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the 
>>> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, 
>>> CLucene would need a champion
>>> 
>>> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>>> 
>>> ryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Ryan,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
>>> understanding
>>>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no 
>>>> incubation
>>> process
>>>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
>>> stability,
>>>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
>>> champion,
>>>> may this be a call for one.
>>>> 
>>>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than 
>>>> Lucene is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the 
>>>> countrary - many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days 
>>>> were later adapted by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue.
>>>> Also, I believe CLucene has a great part in promoting Lucene, 
>>>> especially among non-Java
>>> developers.
>>>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net 
>>>> for
>>> example
>>>> has ever been.
>>>> 
>>>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
>>> defined
>>>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>>> 
>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>>> 
>>>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>>> 
>>>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
>>> premature
>>>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to 
>>>> champion it -- do the real work to make it happen.
>>>> 
>>>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I 
>>>> can
>>> also
>>>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone 
>>>> actually can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>>> 
>>>> ryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request 
>>>>> for the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very 
>>>>> widely for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to 
>>>>> people who like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or 
>>>>> reduce the overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and 
>>>>> eventually for users of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release 
>>>>> conforms to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git 
>>>>> repository works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a 
>>>>> while
> now.
>>>>> More info is available in our website
>>>>> (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
>> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
>>>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal 
>>>>> help to do that correctly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done 
>>>>> from our
>>>> end.
>>>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the 
>>>>> Lucene community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
>> Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
>> ICQ: 104465785
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com/

Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Grant,

Thanks for your reply, and for the PMC on their time.

I understand your reasoning. We hoped becoming a Lucene sub-project will
bring us more attention. Being a TLP may miss that goal, although being an
ASF TLP definitely has benefits of its own.

We will discuss this internally and resume from there.

Thanks again.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant Ingersoll
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 5:27 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

Sorry for the delay, the holiday weekend snuck up on me sooner than I
thought it would. 

The consensus on CLucene is that it should go through incubation with the
idea of becoming a TLP on its own, if it wishes to be a part of the ASF.
The primary reason for this is the ASF tries to focus TLPs on a particular
community with a particular set of goals/committers/contributors and to not
overlap them with other communities that may have different goals.  On the
surface it would seem CLucene has some overlap (same name, same file
format), but it is pretty clear the overlap stops there in terms of the
actual users, contributors, code repositories, committers, etc.  (And yes,
this is true, to some extent except for the fact that they are mostly
auto-generated, for the other ports here as well and that is something we
are evaluating).  If you're still interested in being a part of the ASF, I'd
put together and present your proposal over on general@incubator.apache.org.
Before you go into incubation, you may wish to read up a bit more on the ASF
and how projects are expected to run, as it may be different from what you
are used to vis-a-vis running a project on Source Forge.  See
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html for more information, as
well as http://incubator.apache.org.

-Grant


On May 31, 2010, at 5:49 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Have the PMC came to a decision on this?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Itamar. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant 
> Ingersoll
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:30 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
> 
> Hi Itamar,
> 
> The PMC is discussing this internally.   It is pretty clear at this point
> that CLucene needs to go through Incubation, so by all means start the 
> process there (see http://incubator.apache.org).  Also, keep in mind, 
> that many things have changed for Lucene in regards to subprojects in 
> recent months, so despite the fact that we have other "ports" under 
> Lucene right now due to legacy reasons, it doesn't imply that adding 
> another would be good for this particular TLP.  That isn't to say that 
> CLucene doesn't have a place at the ASF.  Generally speaking, the ASF does
not want "umbrella"
> projects covering disjoint communities b/c it often leads to 
> unnecessary bureaucratic problems at the PMC level related to things 
> like voting, releases, project direction, etc.
> 
> At any rate, we should be wrapping up our PMC discussion by tomorrow, 
> so I will update this thread at that time.
> 
> Thanks,
> Grant
> 
> On May 26, 2010, at 7:36 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:
> 
>> Earwin,
>> 
>> Considering the fact that Lucy is not planning on complementing 
>> Lucene's API, while CLucene's goal is to be a one-by-one port, I 
>> would say no relationship. Also, CLucene is written in C++ and not C.
>> 
>> Re. Sphinx - I'm not familiar enough with it to really comment on 
>> this, but I'd assume this is more of a Lucene vs Sphinx question. Do 
>> the prons and cons, throw in some benchmarks, and then give CLucene a 
>> couple of extra points for being cross-platform, and 5-10 times 
>> faster than the equivallent Lucene version. I had a quick look, and 
>> it seems like Lucene is much more scalable (esp. considering the 
>> latest
>> developments) and some even claim that "Lucene performance is unmatched".
>> 
>> Also, unless a restrictive license isn't a show stopper for you, 
>> Sphinx is released under GPL.
>> 
>> Itamar. 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Earwin Burrfoot [mailto:earwin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:06 AM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>> 
>> I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
>> Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?
>> 
>> 2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
>>> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the 
>>> same this is what we'll be doing.
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure 
>>> where this is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this 
>>> from being discussed, do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone 
>>> with good knowledge of this process could respond and help us move 
>>> this forward. I can be contacted privately if needed.
>>> 
>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>> 
>>> Thanks Itamar-
>>> 
>>> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as 
>>> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be 
>>> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then 
>>> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own 
>>> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the 
>>> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, 
>>> CLucene would need a champion
>>> 
>>> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>>> 
>>> ryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Ryan,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
>>> understanding
>>>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no 
>>>> incubation
>>> process
>>>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
>>> stability,
>>>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
>>> champion,
>>>> may this be a call for one.
>>>> 
>>>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than 
>>>> Lucene is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the 
>>>> countrary - many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days 
>>>> were later adapted by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue.
>>>> Also, I believe CLucene has a great part in promoting Lucene, 
>>>> especially among non-Java
>>> developers.
>>>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net 
>>>> for
>>> example
>>>> has ever been.
>>>> 
>>>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
>>> defined
>>>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>>> 
>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>>> 
>>>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>>> 
>>>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
>>> premature
>>>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to 
>>>> champion it -- do the real work to make it happen.
>>>> 
>>>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I 
>>>> can
>>> also
>>>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone 
>>>> actually can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>>> 
>>>> ryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request 
>>>>> for the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very 
>>>>> widely for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to 
>>>>> people who like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or 
>>>>> reduce the overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and 
>>>>> eventually for users of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release 
>>>>> conforms to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git 
>>>>> repository works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a 
>>>>> while
> now.
>>>>> More info is available in our website
>>>>> (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
>> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
>>>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal 
>>>>> help to do that correctly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done 
>>>>> from our
>>>> end.
>>>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the 
>>>>> Lucene community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
>> Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
>> ICQ: 104465785
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com/

Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Grant,

Thanks for your reply, and for the PMC on their time.

I understand your reasoning. We hoped becoming a Lucene sub-project will
bring us more attention. Being a TLP may miss that goal, although being an
ASF TLP definitely has benefits of its own.

We will discuss this internally and resume from there.

Thanks again.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant Ingersoll
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 5:27 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

Sorry for the delay, the holiday weekend snuck up on me sooner than I
thought it would. 

The consensus on CLucene is that it should go through incubation with the
idea of becoming a TLP on its own, if it wishes to be a part of the ASF.
The primary reason for this is the ASF tries to focus TLPs on a particular
community with a particular set of goals/committers/contributors and to not
overlap them with other communities that may have different goals.  On the
surface it would seem CLucene has some overlap (same name, same file
format), but it is pretty clear the overlap stops there in terms of the
actual users, contributors, code repositories, committers, etc.  (And yes,
this is true, to some extent except for the fact that they are mostly
auto-generated, for the other ports here as well and that is something we
are evaluating).  If you're still interested in being a part of the ASF, I'd
put together and present your proposal over on general@incubator.apache.org.
Before you go into incubation, you may wish to read up a bit more on the ASF
and how projects are expected to run, as it may be different from what you
are used to vis-a-vis running a project on Source Forge.  See
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html for more information, as
well as http://incubator.apache.org.

-Grant


On May 31, 2010, at 5:49 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Have the PMC came to a decision on this?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Itamar. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant 
> Ingersoll
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:30 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
> 
> Hi Itamar,
> 
> The PMC is discussing this internally.   It is pretty clear at this point
> that CLucene needs to go through Incubation, so by all means start the 
> process there (see http://incubator.apache.org).  Also, keep in mind, 
> that many things have changed for Lucene in regards to subprojects in 
> recent months, so despite the fact that we have other "ports" under 
> Lucene right now due to legacy reasons, it doesn't imply that adding 
> another would be good for this particular TLP.  That isn't to say that 
> CLucene doesn't have a place at the ASF.  Generally speaking, the ASF does
not want "umbrella"
> projects covering disjoint communities b/c it often leads to 
> unnecessary bureaucratic problems at the PMC level related to things 
> like voting, releases, project direction, etc.
> 
> At any rate, we should be wrapping up our PMC discussion by tomorrow, 
> so I will update this thread at that time.
> 
> Thanks,
> Grant
> 
> On May 26, 2010, at 7:36 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:
> 
>> Earwin,
>> 
>> Considering the fact that Lucy is not planning on complementing 
>> Lucene's API, while CLucene's goal is to be a one-by-one port, I 
>> would say no relationship. Also, CLucene is written in C++ and not C.
>> 
>> Re. Sphinx - I'm not familiar enough with it to really comment on 
>> this, but I'd assume this is more of a Lucene vs Sphinx question. Do 
>> the prons and cons, throw in some benchmarks, and then give CLucene a 
>> couple of extra points for being cross-platform, and 5-10 times 
>> faster than the equivallent Lucene version. I had a quick look, and 
>> it seems like Lucene is much more scalable (esp. considering the 
>> latest
>> developments) and some even claim that "Lucene performance is unmatched".
>> 
>> Also, unless a restrictive license isn't a show stopper for you, 
>> Sphinx is released under GPL.
>> 
>> Itamar. 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Earwin Burrfoot [mailto:earwin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:06 AM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>> 
>> I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
>> Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?
>> 
>> 2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
>>> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the 
>>> same this is what we'll be doing.
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure 
>>> where this is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this 
>>> from being discussed, do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone 
>>> with good knowledge of this process could respond and help us move 
>>> this forward. I can be contacted privately if needed.
>>> 
>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>> 
>>> Thanks Itamar-
>>> 
>>> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as 
>>> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be 
>>> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then 
>>> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own 
>>> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the 
>>> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, 
>>> CLucene would need a champion
>>> 
>>> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>>> 
>>> ryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Ryan,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
>>> understanding
>>>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no 
>>>> incubation
>>> process
>>>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
>>> stability,
>>>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
>>> champion,
>>>> may this be a call for one.
>>>> 
>>>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than 
>>>> Lucene is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the 
>>>> countrary - many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days 
>>>> were later adapted by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue.
>>>> Also, I believe CLucene has a great part in promoting Lucene, 
>>>> especially among non-Java
>>> developers.
>>>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net 
>>>> for
>>> example
>>>> has ever been.
>>>> 
>>>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
>>> defined
>>>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>>> 
>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>>> 
>>>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>>> 
>>>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
>>> premature
>>>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to 
>>>> champion it -- do the real work to make it happen.
>>>> 
>>>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I 
>>>> can
>>> also
>>>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone 
>>>> actually can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>>> 
>>>> ryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request 
>>>>> for the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very 
>>>>> widely for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to 
>>>>> people who like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or 
>>>>> reduce the overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and 
>>>>> eventually for users of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release 
>>>>> conforms to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git 
>>>>> repository works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a 
>>>>> while
> now.
>>>>> More info is available in our website
>>>>> (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
>> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
>>>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal 
>>>>> help to do that correctly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done 
>>>>> from our
>>>> end.
>>>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the 
>>>>> Lucene community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
>> Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
>> ICQ: 104465785
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com/

Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
Hi Itamar,

Sorry for the delay, the holiday weekend snuck up on me sooner than I thought it would. 

The consensus on CLucene is that it should go through incubation with the idea of becoming a TLP on its own, if it wishes to be a part of the ASF.  The primary reason for this is the ASF tries to focus TLPs on a particular community with a particular set of goals/committers/contributors and to not overlap them with other communities that may have different goals.  On the surface it would seem CLucene has some overlap (same name, same file format), but it is pretty clear the overlap stops there in terms of the actual users, contributors, code repositories, committers, etc.  (And yes, this is true, to some extent except for the fact that they are mostly auto-generated, for the other ports here as well and that is something we are evaluating).  If you're still interested in being a part of the ASF, I'd put together and present your proposal over on general@incubator.apache.org.   Before you go into incubation, you may wish to read up a bit more on the ASF and how projects are expected to run, as it may be different from what you are used to vis-a-vis running a project on Source Forge.  See http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html for more information, as well as http://incubator.apache.org.

-Grant


On May 31, 2010, at 5:49 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Have the PMC came to a decision on this?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Itamar. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant Ingersoll
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:30 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
> 
> Hi Itamar,
> 
> The PMC is discussing this internally.   It is pretty clear at this point
> that CLucene needs to go through Incubation, so by all means start the
> process there (see http://incubator.apache.org).  Also, keep in mind, that
> many things have changed for Lucene in regards to subprojects in recent
> months, so despite the fact that we have other "ports" under Lucene right
> now due to legacy reasons, it doesn't imply that adding another would be
> good for this particular TLP.  That isn't to say that CLucene doesn't have a
> place at the ASF.  Generally speaking, the ASF does not want "umbrella"
> projects covering disjoint communities b/c it often leads to unnecessary
> bureaucratic problems at the PMC level related to things like voting,
> releases, project direction, etc. 
> 
> At any rate, we should be wrapping up our PMC discussion by tomorrow, so I
> will update this thread at that time.
> 
> Thanks,
> Grant
> 
> On May 26, 2010, at 7:36 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:
> 
>> Earwin,
>> 
>> Considering the fact that Lucy is not planning on complementing 
>> Lucene's API, while CLucene's goal is to be a one-by-one port, I would 
>> say no relationship. Also, CLucene is written in C++ and not C.
>> 
>> Re. Sphinx - I'm not familiar enough with it to really comment on 
>> this, but I'd assume this is more of a Lucene vs Sphinx question. Do 
>> the prons and cons, throw in some benchmarks, and then give CLucene a 
>> couple of extra points for being cross-platform, and 5-10 times faster 
>> than the equivallent Lucene version. I had a quick look, and it seems 
>> like Lucene is much more scalable (esp. considering the latest 
>> developments) and some even claim that "Lucene performance is unmatched".
>> 
>> Also, unless a restrictive license isn't a show stopper for you, 
>> Sphinx is released under GPL.
>> 
>> Itamar. 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Earwin Burrfoot [mailto:earwin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:06 AM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>> 
>> I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
>> Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?
>> 
>> 2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
>>> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the 
>>> same this is what we'll be doing.
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure 
>>> where this is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this 
>>> from being discussed, do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone 
>>> with good knowledge of this process could respond and help us move 
>>> this forward. I can be contacted privately if needed.
>>> 
>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>> 
>>> Thanks Itamar-
>>> 
>>> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as 
>>> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be 
>>> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then 
>>> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own 
>>> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the 
>>> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, 
>>> CLucene would need a champion
>>> 
>>> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>>> 
>>> ryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Ryan,
>>>> 
>>>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
>>> understanding
>>>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation
>>> process
>>>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
>>> stability,
>>>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
>>> champion,
>>>> may this be a call for one.
>>>> 
>>>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than 
>>>> Lucene is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the 
>>>> countrary - many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days 
>>>> were later adapted by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue.
>>>> Also, I believe CLucene has a great part in promoting Lucene, 
>>>> especially among non-Java
>>> developers.
>>>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for
>>> example
>>>> has ever been.
>>>> 
>>>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
>>> defined
>>>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>>> 
>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>>> 
>>>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>>> 
>>>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
>>> premature
>>>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion 
>>>> it -- do the real work to make it happen.
>>>> 
>>>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I 
>>>> can
>>> also
>>>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone 
>>>> actually can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>>> 
>>>> ryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request 
>>>>> for the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very 
>>>>> widely for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to 
>>>>> people who like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or 
>>>>> reduce the overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and 
>>>>> eventually for users of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release 
>>>>> conforms to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git 
>>>>> repository works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while
> now.
>>>>> More info is available in our website
>>>>> (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
>> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>>> 
>>>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
>>>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal 
>>>>> help to do that correctly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from 
>>>>> our
>>>> end.
>>>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the 
>>>>> Lucene community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Itamar.
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
>> Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
>> ICQ: 104465785
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com/

Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene: http://www.lucidimagination.com/search


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Hi,

Have the PMC came to a decision on this?

Thanks.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant Ingersoll
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:30 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

The PMC is discussing this internally.   It is pretty clear at this point
that CLucene needs to go through Incubation, so by all means start the
process there (see http://incubator.apache.org).  Also, keep in mind, that
many things have changed for Lucene in regards to subprojects in recent
months, so despite the fact that we have other "ports" under Lucene right
now due to legacy reasons, it doesn't imply that adding another would be
good for this particular TLP.  That isn't to say that CLucene doesn't have a
place at the ASF.  Generally speaking, the ASF does not want "umbrella"
projects covering disjoint communities b/c it often leads to unnecessary
bureaucratic problems at the PMC level related to things like voting,
releases, project direction, etc. 

At any rate, we should be wrapping up our PMC discussion by tomorrow, so I
will update this thread at that time.

Thanks,
Grant

On May 26, 2010, at 7:36 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:

> Earwin,
> 
> Considering the fact that Lucy is not planning on complementing 
> Lucene's API, while CLucene's goal is to be a one-by-one port, I would 
> say no relationship. Also, CLucene is written in C++ and not C.
> 
> Re. Sphinx - I'm not familiar enough with it to really comment on 
> this, but I'd assume this is more of a Lucene vs Sphinx question. Do 
> the prons and cons, throw in some benchmarks, and then give CLucene a 
> couple of extra points for being cross-platform, and 5-10 times faster 
> than the equivallent Lucene version. I had a quick look, and it seems 
> like Lucene is much more scalable (esp. considering the latest 
> developments) and some even claim that "Lucene performance is unmatched".
> 
> Also, unless a restrictive license isn't a show stopper for you, 
> Sphinx is released under GPL.
> 
> Itamar. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earwin Burrfoot [mailto:earwin@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:06 AM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
> 
> I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
> Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?
> 
> 2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
>> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the 
>> same this is what we'll be doing.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure 
>> where this is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this 
>> from being discussed, do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone 
>> with good knowledge of this process could respond and help us move 
>> this forward. I can be contacted privately if needed.
>> 
>> Itamar.
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>> 
>> Thanks Itamar-
>> 
>> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as 
>> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be 
>> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then 
>> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own 
>> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the 
>> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, 
>> CLucene would need a champion
>> 
>> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>> 
>> ryan
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>> <it...@code972.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Ryan,
>>> 
>>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
>> understanding
>>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation
>> process
>>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
>> stability,
>>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
>> champion,
>>> may this be a call for one.
>>> 
>>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than 
>>> Lucene is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the 
>>> countrary - many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days 
>>> were later adapted by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue.
>>> Also, I believe CLucene has a great part in promoting Lucene, 
>>> especially among non-Java
>> developers.
>>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for
>> example
>>> has ever been.
>>> 
>>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
>> defined
>>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>> 
>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>> 
>>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>> 
>>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
>> premature
>>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion 
>>> it -- do the real work to make it happen.
>>> 
>>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I 
>>> can
>> also
>>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone 
>>> actually can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>> 
>>> ryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request 
>>>> for the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>> 
>>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very 
>>>> widely for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to 
>>>> people who like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or 
>>>> reduce the overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and 
>>>> eventually for users of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>> 
>>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release 
>>>> conforms to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git 
>>>> repository works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while
now.
>>>> More info is available in our website
>>>> (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>> 
>>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
>>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal 
>>>> help to do that correctly.
>>>> 
>>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from 
>>>> our
>>> end.
>>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the 
>>>> Lucene community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>> 
>>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
> Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
> ICQ: 104465785
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
Hi Itamar,

The PMC is discussing this internally.   It is pretty clear at this point that CLucene needs to go through Incubation, so by all means start the process there (see http://incubator.apache.org).  Also, keep in mind, that many things have changed for Lucene in regards to subprojects in recent months, so despite the fact that we have other "ports" under Lucene right now due to legacy reasons, it doesn't imply that adding another would be good for this particular TLP.  That isn't to say that CLucene doesn't have a place at the ASF.  Generally speaking, the ASF does not want "umbrella" projects covering disjoint communities b/c it often leads to unnecessary bureaucratic problems at the PMC level related to things like voting, releases, project direction, etc. 

At any rate, we should be wrapping up our PMC discussion by tomorrow, so I will update this thread at that time.

Thanks,
Grant

On May 26, 2010, at 7:36 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:

> Earwin,
> 
> Considering the fact that Lucy is not planning on complementing Lucene's
> API, while CLucene's goal is to be a one-by-one port, I would say no
> relationship. Also, CLucene is written in C++ and not C.
> 
> Re. Sphinx - I'm not familiar enough with it to really comment on this, but
> I'd assume this is more of a Lucene vs Sphinx question. Do the prons and
> cons, throw in some benchmarks, and then give CLucene a couple of extra
> points for being cross-platform, and 5-10 times faster than the equivallent
> Lucene version. I had a quick look, and it seems like Lucene is much more
> scalable (esp. considering the latest developments) and some even claim that
> "Lucene performance is unmatched".
> 
> Also, unless a restrictive license isn't a show stopper for you, Sphinx is
> released under GPL.
> 
> Itamar. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earwin Burrfoot [mailto:earwin@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:06 AM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
> 
> I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
> Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?
> 
> 2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
>> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the 
>> same this is what we'll be doing.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure 
>> where this is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this from 
>> being discussed, do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone with 
>> good knowledge of this process could respond and help us move this 
>> forward. I can be contacted privately if needed.
>> 
>> Itamar.
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>> 
>> Thanks Itamar-
>> 
>> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as 
>> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be 
>> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then 
>> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own 
>> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the 
>> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, CLucene 
>> would need a champion
>> 
>> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>> 
>> ryan
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>> <it...@code972.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Ryan,
>>> 
>>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
>> understanding
>>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation
>> process
>>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
>> stability,
>>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
>> champion,
>>> may this be a call for one.
>>> 
>>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than 
>>> Lucene is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the 
>>> countrary - many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days 
>>> were later adapted by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue. 
>>> Also, I believe CLucene has a great part in promoting Lucene, 
>>> especially among non-Java
>> developers.
>>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for
>> example
>>> has ever been.
>>> 
>>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
>> defined
>>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>> 
>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>> 
>>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>> 
>>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
>> premature
>>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion 
>>> it -- do the real work to make it happen.
>>> 
>>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I 
>>> can
>> also
>>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone 
>>> actually can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>> 
>>> ryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>>> <it...@code972.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
>>>> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>> 
>>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very 
>>>> widely for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to 
>>>> people who like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or 
>>>> reduce the overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and 
>>>> eventually for users of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>> 
>>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
>>>> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
>>>> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. 
>>>> More info is available in our website 
>>>> (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>> 
>>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
>>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal 
>>>> help to do that correctly.
>>>> 
>>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from 
>>>> our
>>> end.
>>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
>>>> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>> 
>>>> Itamar.
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
> Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
> ICQ: 104465785
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Earwin,

Considering the fact that Lucy is not planning on complementing Lucene's
API, while CLucene's goal is to be a one-by-one port, I would say no
relationship. Also, CLucene is written in C++ and not C.

Re. Sphinx - I'm not familiar enough with it to really comment on this, but
I'd assume this is more of a Lucene vs Sphinx question. Do the prons and
cons, throw in some benchmarks, and then give CLucene a couple of extra
points for being cross-platform, and 5-10 times faster than the equivallent
Lucene version. I had a quick look, and it seems like Lucene is much more
scalable (esp. considering the latest developments) and some even claim that
"Lucene performance is unmatched".

Also, unless a restrictive license isn't a show stopper for you, Sphinx is
released under GPL.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Earwin Burrfoot [mailto:earwin@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:06 AM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?

2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the 
> same this is what we'll be doing.
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure 
> where this is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this from 
> being discussed, do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone with 
> good knowledge of this process could respond and help us move this 
> forward. I can be contacted privately if needed.
>
> Itamar.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>
> Thanks Itamar-
>
> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as 
> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be 
> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then 
> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own 
> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the 
> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, CLucene 
> would need a champion
>
> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>
> ryan
>
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
> <it...@code972.com>
> wrote:
>> Ryan,
>>
>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
> understanding
>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation
> process
>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
> stability,
>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
> champion,
>> may this be a call for one.
>>
>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than 
>> Lucene is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the 
>> countrary - many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days 
>> were later adapted by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue. 
>> Also, I believe CLucene has a great part in promoting Lucene, 
>> especially among non-Java
> developers.
>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for
> example
>> has ever been.
>>
>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
> defined
>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>
>> Itamar.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>
>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>
>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
> premature
>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion 
>> it -- do the real work to make it happen.
>>
>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I 
>> can
> also
>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone 
>> actually can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>
>> ryan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko 
>> <it...@code972.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
>>> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>
>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very 
>>> widely for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to 
>>> people who like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or 
>>> reduce the overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and 
>>> eventually for users of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>
>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
>>> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
>>> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. 
>>> More info is available in our website 
>>> (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
(https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>
>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal 
>>> help to do that correctly.
>>>
>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from 
>>> our
>> end.
>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
>>> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>
>>> Itamar.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For 
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>



--
Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
ICQ: 104465785

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Earwin Burrfoot <ea...@gmail.com>.
I wonder, what's going to be the relationship between this and Lucy?
Also, how do both of them compare to Sphinx?

2010/5/27 Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>:
> Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the same
> this is what we'll be doing.
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure where this
> is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this from being discussed,
> do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone with good knowledge of this
> process could respond and help us move this forward. I can be contacted
> privately if needed.
>
> Itamar.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>
> Thanks Itamar-
>
> Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as
> the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be
> needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then
> the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own
> culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the
> whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, CLucene
> would need a champion
>
> again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.
>
> ryan
>
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>
> wrote:
>> Ryan,
>>
>> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
> understanding
>> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation
> process
>> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
> stability,
>> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
> champion,
>> may this be a call for one.
>>
>> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than Lucene
>> is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the countrary -
>> many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days were later adapted
>> by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue. Also, I believe CLucene
>> has a great part in promoting Lucene, especially among non-Java
> developers.
>> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for
> example
>> has ever been.
>>
>> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
> defined
>> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>>
>> Itamar.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>>
>> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>>
>> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
> premature
>> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion it --
>> do the real work to make it happen.
>>
>> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I can
> also
>> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone actually
>> can work with them, it is a moot point.
>>
>> ryan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for
>>> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>>
>>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely
>>> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who
>>> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the
>>> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users
>>> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>>
>>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms
>>> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository
>>> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More
>>> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and
>>> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>>
>>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0
>>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help
>>> to do that correctly.
>>>
>>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
>> end.
>>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene
>>> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>>
>>> Itamar.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
>> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>



-- 
Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4
ICQ: 104465785

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Ryan, thanks. I understand, and obviously if the PMC will think the same
this is what we'll be doing.

Unfortunately, I haven't heard from the PMC yet, and I'm not sure where this
is going exactly. If the proposal is what keeping this from being discussed,
do let me know. Otherwise, I'm hoping someone with good knowledge of this
process could respond and help us move this forward. I can be contacted
privately if needed.

Itamar.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31 AM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Thanks Itamar-

Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as
the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be
needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then
the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own
culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the
whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, CLucene
would need a champion

again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.

ryan


On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>
wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my
understanding
> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation
process
> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven
stability,
> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a
champion,
> may this be a call for one.
>
> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than Lucene
> is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the countrary -
> many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days were later adapted
> by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue. Also, I believe CLucene
> has a great part in promoting Lucene, especially among non-Java
developers.
> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for
example
> has ever been.
>
> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly
defined
> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>
> Itamar.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>
> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>
> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
premature
> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion it --
> do the real work to make it happen.
>
> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I can
also
> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone actually
> can work with them, it is a moot point.
>
> ryan
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for
>> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>
>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely
>> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who
>> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the
>> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users
>> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>
>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms
>> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository
>> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More
>> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and
>> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>
>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0
>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help
>> to do that correctly.
>>
>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
> end.
>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene
>> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>
>> Itamar.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Itamar-

Apologies since the last email is not very clear...   Not speaking as
the PMC, my feeling is that for this an incubation process will be
needed.  With Apache, the projects are more about the community then
the code -- since there exists a CLucene community with its own
culture etc, i think the incubation process makes sense (that is the
whole point of the incubator - in my opinion)  For incubation, CLucene
would need a champion

again, just throwing it out there, and *not* speaking as the PMC.

ryan


On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com> wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my understanding
> that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation process
> nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven stability,
> I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a champion,
> may this be a call for one.
>
> Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than Lucene
> is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the countrary -
> many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days were later adapted
> by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue. Also, I believe CLucene
> has a great part in promoting Lucene, especially among non-Java developers.
> So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for example
> has ever been.
>
> I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly defined
> and started. A proposal is being worked on.
>
> Itamar.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject
>
> Having skimmed most of the thread...
>
> It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be premature
> considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion it --
> do the real work to make it happen.
>
> I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I can also
> see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone actually
> can work with them, it is a moot point.
>
> ryan
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for
>> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>>
>> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely
>> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who
>> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the
>> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users
>> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>>
>> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms
>> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository
>> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More
>> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and
>> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>>
>> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0
>> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help
>> to do that correctly.
>>
>> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
> end.
>> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene
>> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>>
>> Itamar.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Ryan,

I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my understanding
that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation process
nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven stability,
I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a champion,
may this be a call for one.

Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than Lucene
is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the countrary -
many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days were later adapted
by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue. Also, I believe CLucene
has a great part in promoting Lucene, especially among non-Java developers.
So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for example
has ever been.

I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly defined
and started. A proposal is being worked on.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Having skimmed most of the thread...

It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be premature
considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion it --
do the real work to make it happen.

I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I can also
see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone actually
can work with them, it is a moot point.

ryan




On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely 
> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who 
> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the 
> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users 
> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More 
> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and 
> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help 
> to do that correctly.
>
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>
> Itamar.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Ryan,

I'm not familiar with the Apache way of doing things. It is my understanding
that if the invitation is initiated by the PMC itself, no incubation process
nor a champion are required. Considering CLucene's age and proven stability,
I was hoping we could go that route. If we need a PMC member as a champion,
may this be a call for one.

Considering CLucene is targetting a very different users base than Lucene
is, I don't see how it can possibly be a distraction. On the countrary -
many optimizations done in CLucene back in the old days were later adapted
by Lucene itself, and I'm sure this will continue. Also, I believe CLucene
has a great part in promoting Lucene, especially among non-Java developers.
So, I don't see how CLucene is a moot point more than Lucene.Net for example
has ever been.

I would love to be working with anyone to get this process properly defined
and started. A proposal is being worked on.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan McKinley [mailto:ryantxu@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:51 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Having skimmed most of the thread...

It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be premature
considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to champion it --
do the real work to make it happen.

I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I can also
see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless someone actually
can work with them, it is a moot point.

ryan




On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely 
> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who 
> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the 
> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users 
> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More 
> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and 
> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help 
> to do that correctly.
>
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>
> Itamar.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
Having skimmed most of the thread...

It seems the question of if CLucene should be a sub-project may be
premature considering that it would really need someone in the PMC to
champion it -- do the real work to make it happen.

I can see many ways this could be a good addition to lucene land, I
can also see many ways that it may just be a distraction.  Unless
someone actually can work with them, it is a moot point.

ryan




On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for the
> CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely for a
> few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who like to use
> Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the overheads of using a
> JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users of various high-level or
> scripting languages.
>
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms to Java
> Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository works with 2.3.2
> indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More info is available in
> our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 licenses
> (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help to do that
> correctly.
>
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>
> Itamar.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Thanks Chris.

I'll be creating such a proposal, and we'll continue from there. Looking
forward to any further instructions on this process.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mailto:chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 8:08 AM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org; Lucene mailing list
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

I think what you would do is throw together a proposal mentioning things
like:

* who would be the initial committers for the project
* whether those committers have Apache ICLAs [1] on file, or not
* what¹s the rationale behind the project (yours would have strong
rationale, since Lucene is home to more than a few ports of the core Java
lib)
* what the licensing issues to be dealt with are
* what the affiliations of your current committers are

In general, whether you go the route of the Apache Incubator [2] or not,
these guidelines here [3] in general apply. You would then approach either
the Apache Incubator and grow your project there, with the intent of
graduating to a Lucene sub-project, or you could go to the Lucene PMC and
try to start a project directly there. Since I didn¹t follow the genesis of
the other Lucene ports, let¹s see what they think (I¹m CC¹ing general@lucene
to find out).

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
[2] http://incubator.apache.org
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html


On 5/19/10 3:57 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <it...@code972.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>  
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>  
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely 
> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who 
> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the 
> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users 
> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>  
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More 
> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and 
> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>  
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help 
> to do that correctly.
>  
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>  
> Itamar.
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Thanks Chris.

I'll be creating such a proposal, and we'll continue from there. Looking
forward to any further instructions on this process.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mailto:chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 8:08 AM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org; Lucene mailing list
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

I think what you would do is throw together a proposal mentioning things
like:

* who would be the initial committers for the project
* whether those committers have Apache ICLAs [1] on file, or not
* what¹s the rationale behind the project (yours would have strong
rationale, since Lucene is home to more than a few ports of the core Java
lib)
* what the licensing issues to be dealt with are
* what the affiliations of your current committers are

In general, whether you go the route of the Apache Incubator [2] or not,
these guidelines here [3] in general apply. You would then approach either
the Apache Incubator and grow your project there, with the intent of
graduating to a Lucene sub-project, or you could go to the Lucene PMC and
try to start a project directly there. Since I didn¹t follow the genesis of
the other Lucene ports, let¹s see what they think (I¹m CC¹ing general@lucene
to find out).

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
[2] http://incubator.apache.org
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html


On 5/19/10 3:57 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <it...@code972.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>  
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>  
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely 
> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who 
> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the 
> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users 
> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>  
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More 
> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and 
> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>  
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help 
> to do that correctly.
>  
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>  
> Itamar.
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Thanks Chris.

I'll be creating such a proposal, and we'll continue from there. Looking
forward to any further instructions on this process.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mailto:chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 8:08 AM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org; Lucene mailing list
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

I think what you would do is throw together a proposal mentioning things
like:

* who would be the initial committers for the project
* whether those committers have Apache ICLAs [1] on file, or not
* what¹s the rationale behind the project (yours would have strong
rationale, since Lucene is home to more than a few ports of the core Java
lib)
* what the licensing issues to be dealt with are
* what the affiliations of your current committers are

In general, whether you go the route of the Apache Incubator [2] or not,
these guidelines here [3] in general apply. You would then approach either
the Apache Incubator and grow your project there, with the intent of
graduating to a Lucene sub-project, or you could go to the Lucene PMC and
try to start a project directly there. Since I didn¹t follow the genesis of
the other Lucene ports, let¹s see what they think (I¹m CC¹ing general@lucene
to find out).

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
[2] http://incubator.apache.org
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html


On 5/19/10 3:57 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <it...@code972.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>  
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>  
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely 
> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who 
> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the 
> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users 
> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>  
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More 
> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and 
> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>  
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help 
> to do that correctly.
>  
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>  
> Itamar.
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

RE: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by Itamar Syn-Hershko <it...@code972.com>.
Thanks Chris.

I'll be creating such a proposal, and we'll continue from there. Looking
forward to any further instructions on this process.

Itamar. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mailto:chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 8:08 AM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org; Lucene mailing list
Subject: Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Hi Itamar,

I think what you would do is throw together a proposal mentioning things
like:

* who would be the initial committers for the project
* whether those committers have Apache ICLAs [1] on file, or not
* what¹s the rationale behind the project (yours would have strong
rationale, since Lucene is home to more than a few ports of the core Java
lib)
* what the licensing issues to be dealt with are
* what the affiliations of your current committers are

In general, whether you go the route of the Apache Incubator [2] or not,
these guidelines here [3] in general apply. You would then approach either
the Apache Incubator and grow your project there, with the intent of
graduating to a Lucene sub-project, or you could go to the Lucene PMC and
try to start a project directly there. Since I didn¹t follow the genesis of
the other Lucene ports, let¹s see what they think (I¹m CC¹ing general@lucene
to find out).

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
[2] http://incubator.apache.org
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html


On 5/19/10 3:57 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <it...@code972.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>  
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for 
> the CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>  
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely 
> for a few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who 
> like to use Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the 
> overheads of using a JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users 
> of various high-level or scripting languages.
>  
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms 
> to Java Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository 
> works with 2.3.2 indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More 
> info is available in our website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and 
> project page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>  
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 
> licenses (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help 
> to do that correctly.
>  
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our
end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene 
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>  
> Itamar.
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Hi Itamar,

I think what you would do is throw together a proposal mentioning things
like:

* who would be the initial committers for the project
* whether those committers have Apache ICLAs [1] on file, or not
* what¹s the rationale behind the project (yours would have strong
rationale, since Lucene is home to more than a few ports of the core Java
lib)
* what the licensing issues to be dealt with are
* what the affiliations of your current committers are

In general, whether you go the route of the Apache Incubator [2] or not,
these guidelines here [3] in general apply. You would then approach either
the Apache Incubator and grow your project there, with the intent of
graduating to a Lucene sub-project, or you could go to the Lucene PMC and
try to start a project directly there. Since I didn¹t follow the genesis of
the other Lucene ports, let¹s see what they think (I¹m CC¹ing general@lucene
to find out).

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
[2] http://incubator.apache.org
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html


On 5/19/10 3:57 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <it...@code972.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>  
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for the
> CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>  
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely for a
> few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who like to use
> Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the overheads of using a
> JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users of various high-level or
> scripting languages.
>  
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms to Java
> Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository works with 2.3.2
> indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More info is available in our
> website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>  
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 licenses
> (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help to do that
> correctly.
>  
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>  
> Itamar.
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: Adding CLucene as a Lucene subproject

Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Hi Itamar,

I think what you would do is throw together a proposal mentioning things
like:

* who would be the initial committers for the project
* whether those committers have Apache ICLAs [1] on file, or not
* what¹s the rationale behind the project (yours would have strong
rationale, since Lucene is home to more than a few ports of the core Java
lib)
* what the licensing issues to be dealt with are
* what the affiliations of your current committers are

In general, whether you go the route of the Apache Incubator [2] or not,
these guidelines here [3] in general apply. You would then approach either
the Apache Incubator and grow your project there, with the intent of
graduating to a Lucene sub-project, or you could go to the Lucene PMC and
try to start a project directly there. Since I didn¹t follow the genesis of
the other Lucene ports, let¹s see what they think (I¹m CC¹ing general@lucene
to find out).

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
[2] http://incubator.apache.org
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html


On 5/19/10 3:57 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <it...@code972.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>  
> Following a recent discussion with Otis, I would like to request for the
> CLucene project to join the ASF, as a sub-project of Lucene.
>  
> CLucene is an important port of Lucene, and is being used very widely for a
> few years now. The project aims to be attractive to people who like to use
> Lucene but wants to increase performance or reduce the overheads of using a
> JVM, for C++ developers; and eventually for users of various high-level or
> scripting languages.
>  
> We are currently hosting on SourceForge; our latest release conforms to Java
> Lucene 1.9.1, but the master branch in our git repository works with 2.3.2
> indexes, and is being worked on for a while now. More info is available in our
> website (http://clucene.sourceforge.net/) and project page
> (https://sourceforge.net/projects/clucene/).
>  
> CLucene is currently released under the LGPL and the Apache 2.0 licenses
> (dual). If this needs changing, we will need some legal help to do that
> correctly.
>  
> Please advise on how to pursue this, and what needs to be done from our end.
> This move is very important to us, and could also benefit the Lucene
> community. Hopefully, we could make this happen.
>  
> Itamar.
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++