You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@lucenenet.apache.org by Chris <La...@dcpromo.com> on 2010/11/04 20:29:01 UTC
Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target framework at 2.0?
I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target framework such as:
- Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
* Windows CE
* Compact Framework
* Windows Micro
* Windows Phone
* Mono compatibility?
- Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given framework
- ...?
Chris
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Ben Martz <be...@gmail.com>.
Unless we plan to implement VS2010-specific features or upgrade the target framework I'm not sure what the motivation would be to replace the solution file itself other than locking out anyone who chooses to use an older (supported) platform.
Once you perform the local upgrade a new VS2010 solution file exists separately from the existing VS2005 solution file and doesn't interfere in any way with the ability to build or update the source files from SVN and so on.
Just my 2c. I'm using VS2010 so it doesn't affect my usage either way.
Cheers,
Ben
Chris wrote:
> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target framework at 2.0?
>
> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target framework such as:
> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> * Windows CE
> * Compact Framework
> * Windows Micro
> * Windows Phone
> * Mono compatibility?
> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given framework
> - ...?
>
>
> Chris
>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Upgrading to VS2010 would alienate anyone who is on VS2008, which probably
has the largest install base at the moment.
I think that there should be three different solution files, one for VS2005,
VS2008, and VS2010. This way, regardless of which IDE the developer is
using, they can work with the code. This is not very difficult to do.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Chris <La...@dcpromo.com> wrote:
> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree
> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target
> framework at 2.0?
>
> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> framework such as:
> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> * Windows CE
> * Compact Framework
> * Windows Micro
> * Windows Phone
> * Mono compatibility?
> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
> framework
> - ...?
>
>
> Chris
>
>
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Chris <La...@dcpromo.com>.
And to make things easier, I do remember seeing a trick where you can automatically & dynamically add all files under a given folder, by simply editing the .csproj file with the "*.*" directive.
I do know this is definitely possible, but forget if anything else is needed.
________________________________________
From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 1:24 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
My understanding and experience has been that solution files don't
know about anything but solution items and projects. The .csproj files
[really just msbuild files maintained by visual studio] are where the
real fun happens. So, as long as the .csproj file is in common we
don't have to worry so much. I'll add that I did just test my local
copy, which was upgraded to VS2010, using VS2005 and it built.
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tools and information about non-VS solution file version conversions...
>
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/746628/how-can-i-maintain-a-vs-2005-solution-in-visual-studio-2008/747655#747655
>
> That answer references some very good information from Jon Skeet and others,
> including a tool for conversion.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Derek Finlen <DF...@ahmdirect.com> wrote:
>
>> Sounds like a good idea. I could use it at my job :D..
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:44 PM
>> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>>
>> The downside to this tactic is that a committer that is only using VS2010,
>> who adds a file, will only be adding it to the VS2010 solution.
>>
>> Some other user with VS2005 would have to open up the VS2005 solution in
>> VS2005, and add that file in separately...
>>
>> Well, that's assuming that we're relying on VS to make the solutions files.
>> You can auot-generate/update them. The format is fairly straightforward,
>> XML
>> like. It could be scripted to keep them in sync.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Troy
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Wyatt Barnett <wyatt.barnett@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > Gotcha -- the way I've seen it done is one has:
>> >
>> > /src
>> > --Solution_2005.sln
>> > --Solution_2008.sln
>> > --Solution_2010.sln
>> >
>> > And committers can open the one they want.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > I think the primary concern here isn't for users you download the
>> source
>> > and
>> > > compile, but for new committers... If you have VS2010, and you open a
>> > VS2005
>> > > solution, it will just work, but if you modify that solution (add or
>> > remove
>> > > a file, etc), then save, ther'es no way to save to a VS2005 solution.
>> You
>> > > will end up with VS2010 format. Committing that solution back the repo
>> > would
>> > > cause an upgrade.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Troy
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
>> > open a
>> > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>> > >>
>> > >> Arne Claassen
>> > >>
>> > >> MindTouch
>> > >> San Diego, CA
>> > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
>> > agree
>> > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
>> > target
>> > >>> framework at 2.0?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>> > >>> framework such as:
>> > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>> > >>> * Windows CE
>> > >>> * Compact Framework
>> > >>> * Windows Micro
>> > >>> * Windows Phone
>> > >>> * Mono compatibility?
>> > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
>> given
>> > >>> framework
>> > >>> - ...?
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Chris
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>> ###
>>
>> This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally
>> privileged. If you received it in error, you are on notice
>> of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail
>> and then delete this message from your system. Please
>> do not copy it or use it for any purposes or disclose its
>> contents to any other person. To do so could violate
>> state and federal privacy laws. Thank you for your
>> cooperation.
>>
>> ###
>>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Wyatt Barnett <wy...@gmail.com>.
My understanding and experience has been that solution files don't
know about anything but solution items and projects. The .csproj files
[really just msbuild files maintained by visual studio] are where the
real fun happens. So, as long as the .csproj file is in common we
don't have to worry so much. I'll add that I did just test my local
copy, which was upgraded to VS2010, using VS2005 and it built.
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tools and information about non-VS solution file version conversions...
>
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/746628/how-can-i-maintain-a-vs-2005-solution-in-visual-studio-2008/747655#747655
>
> That answer references some very good information from Jon Skeet and others,
> including a tool for conversion.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Derek Finlen <DF...@ahmdirect.com> wrote:
>
>> Sounds like a good idea. I could use it at my job :D..
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:44 PM
>> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>>
>> The downside to this tactic is that a committer that is only using VS2010,
>> who adds a file, will only be adding it to the VS2010 solution.
>>
>> Some other user with VS2005 would have to open up the VS2005 solution in
>> VS2005, and add that file in separately...
>>
>> Well, that's assuming that we're relying on VS to make the solutions files.
>> You can auot-generate/update them. The format is fairly straightforward,
>> XML
>> like. It could be scripted to keep them in sync.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Troy
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Wyatt Barnett <wyatt.barnett@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > Gotcha -- the way I've seen it done is one has:
>> >
>> > /src
>> > --Solution_2005.sln
>> > --Solution_2008.sln
>> > --Solution_2010.sln
>> >
>> > And committers can open the one they want.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > I think the primary concern here isn't for users you download the
>> source
>> > and
>> > > compile, but for new committers... If you have VS2010, and you open a
>> > VS2005
>> > > solution, it will just work, but if you modify that solution (add or
>> > remove
>> > > a file, etc), then save, ther'es no way to save to a VS2005 solution.
>> You
>> > > will end up with VS2010 format. Committing that solution back the repo
>> > would
>> > > cause an upgrade.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Troy
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
>> > open a
>> > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>> > >>
>> > >> Arne Claassen
>> > >>
>> > >> MindTouch
>> > >> San Diego, CA
>> > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
>> > agree
>> > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
>> > target
>> > >>> framework at 2.0?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>> > >>> framework such as:
>> > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>> > >>> * Windows CE
>> > >>> * Compact Framework
>> > >>> * Windows Micro
>> > >>> * Windows Phone
>> > >>> * Mono compatibility?
>> > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
>> given
>> > >>> framework
>> > >>> - ...?
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Chris
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>> ###
>>
>> This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally
>> privileged. If you received it in error, you are on notice
>> of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail
>> and then delete this message from your system. Please
>> do not copy it or use it for any purposes or disclose its
>> contents to any other person. To do so could violate
>> state and federal privacy laws. Thank you for your
>> cooperation.
>>
>> ###
>>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Tools and information about non-VS solution file version conversions...
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/746628/how-can-i-maintain-a-vs-2005-solution-in-visual-studio-2008/747655#747655
That answer references some very good information from Jon Skeet and others,
including a tool for conversion.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Derek Finlen <DF...@ahmdirect.com> wrote:
> Sounds like a good idea. I could use it at my job :D..
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:44 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> The downside to this tactic is that a committer that is only using VS2010,
> who adds a file, will only be adding it to the VS2010 solution.
>
> Some other user with VS2005 would have to open up the VS2005 solution in
> VS2005, and add that file in separately...
>
> Well, that's assuming that we're relying on VS to make the solutions files.
> You can auot-generate/update them. The format is fairly straightforward,
> XML
> like. It could be scripted to keep them in sync.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Wyatt Barnett <wyatt.barnett@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Gotcha -- the way I've seen it done is one has:
> >
> > /src
> > --Solution_2005.sln
> > --Solution_2008.sln
> > --Solution_2010.sln
> >
> > And committers can open the one they want.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think the primary concern here isn't for users you download the
> source
> > and
> > > compile, but for new committers... If you have VS2010, and you open a
> > VS2005
> > > solution, it will just work, but if you modify that solution (add or
> > remove
> > > a file, etc), then save, ther'es no way to save to a VS2005 solution.
> You
> > > will end up with VS2010 format. Committing that solution back the repo
> > would
> > > cause an upgrade.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Troy
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> > open a
> > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > >>
> > >> Arne Claassen
> > >>
> > >> MindTouch
> > >> San Diego, CA
> > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> > agree
> > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> > target
> > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > >>>
> > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> > >>> framework such as:
> > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > >>> * Windows CE
> > >>> * Compact Framework
> > >>> * Windows Micro
> > >>> * Windows Phone
> > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
> given
> > >>> framework
> > >>> - ...?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Chris
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
> ###
>
> This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally
> privileged. If you received it in error, you are on notice
> of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail
> and then delete this message from your system. Please
> do not copy it or use it for any purposes or disclose its
> contents to any other person. To do so could violate
> state and federal privacy laws. Thank you for your
> cooperation.
>
> ###
>
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Derek Finlen <DF...@ahmdirect.com>.
Sounds like a good idea. I could use it at my job :D..
-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:44 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
The downside to this tactic is that a committer that is only using VS2010,
who adds a file, will only be adding it to the VS2010 solution.
Some other user with VS2005 would have to open up the VS2005 solution in
VS2005, and add that file in separately...
Well, that's assuming that we're relying on VS to make the solutions files.
You can auot-generate/update them. The format is fairly straightforward, XML
like. It could be scripted to keep them in sync.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Wyatt Barnett <wy...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Gotcha -- the way I've seen it done is one has:
>
> /src
> --Solution_2005.sln
> --Solution_2008.sln
> --Solution_2010.sln
>
> And committers can open the one they want.
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think the primary concern here isn't for users you download the source
> and
> > compile, but for new committers... If you have VS2010, and you open a
> VS2005
> > solution, it will just work, but if you modify that solution (add or
> remove
> > a file, etc), then save, ther'es no way to save to a VS2005 solution. You
> > will end up with VS2010 format. Committing that solution back the repo
> would
> > cause an upgrade.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Troy
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> open a
> >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> >>
> >> Arne Claassen
> >>
> >> MindTouch
> >> San Diego, CA
> >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> >>
> >>
> >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> >>
> >> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> agree
> >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> target
> >>> framework at 2.0?
> >>>
> >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> >>> framework such as:
> >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> >>> * Windows CE
> >>> * Compact Framework
> >>> * Windows Micro
> >>> * Windows Phone
> >>> * Mono compatibility?
> >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
> >>> framework
> >>> - ...?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Chris
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
###
This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally
privileged. If you received it in error, you are on notice
of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail
and then delete this message from your system. Please
do not copy it or use it for any purposes or disclose its
contents to any other person. To do so could violate
state and federal privacy laws. Thank you for your
cooperation.
###
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
The downside to this tactic is that a committer that is only using VS2010,
who adds a file, will only be adding it to the VS2010 solution.
Some other user with VS2005 would have to open up the VS2005 solution in
VS2005, and add that file in separately...
Well, that's assuming that we're relying on VS to make the solutions files.
You can auot-generate/update them. The format is fairly straightforward, XML
like. It could be scripted to keep them in sync.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Wyatt Barnett <wy...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Gotcha -- the way I've seen it done is one has:
>
> /src
> --Solution_2005.sln
> --Solution_2008.sln
> --Solution_2010.sln
>
> And committers can open the one they want.
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think the primary concern here isn't for users you download the source
> and
> > compile, but for new committers... If you have VS2010, and you open a
> VS2005
> > solution, it will just work, but if you modify that solution (add or
> remove
> > a file, etc), then save, ther'es no way to save to a VS2005 solution. You
> > will end up with VS2010 format. Committing that solution back the repo
> would
> > cause an upgrade.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Troy
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> open a
> >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> >>
> >> Arne Claassen
> >>
> >> MindTouch
> >> San Diego, CA
> >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> >>
> >>
> >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> >>
> >> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> agree
> >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> target
> >>> framework at 2.0?
> >>>
> >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> >>> framework such as:
> >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> >>> * Windows CE
> >>> * Compact Framework
> >>> * Windows Micro
> >>> * Windows Phone
> >>> * Mono compatibility?
> >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
> >>> framework
> >>> - ...?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Chris
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Wyatt Barnett <wy...@gmail.com>.
Gotcha -- the way I've seen it done is one has:
/src
--Solution_2005.sln
--Solution_2008.sln
--Solution_2010.sln
And committers can open the one they want.
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the primary concern here isn't for users you download the source and
> compile, but for new committers... If you have VS2010, and you open a VS2005
> solution, it will just work, but if you modify that solution (add or remove
> a file, etc), then save, ther'es no way to save to a VS2005 solution. You
> will end up with VS2010 format. Committing that solution back the repo would
> cause an upgrade.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily open a
>> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>>
>> Arne Claassen
>>
>> MindTouch
>> San Diego, CA
>> http://twitter.com/sdether
>>
>>
>> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>>
>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree
>>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target
>>> framework at 2.0?
>>>
>>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>>> framework such as:
>>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>>> * Windows CE
>>> * Compact Framework
>>> * Windows Micro
>>> * Windows Phone
>>> * Mono compatibility?
>>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
>>> framework
>>> - ...?
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
I think the primary concern here isn't for users you download the source and
compile, but for new committers... If you have VS2010, and you open a VS2005
solution, it will just work, but if you modify that solution (add or remove
a file, etc), then save, ther'es no way to save to a VS2005 solution. You
will end up with VS2010 format. Committing that solution back the repo would
cause an upgrade.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily open a
> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>
> Arne Claassen
>
> MindTouch
> San Diego, CA
> http://twitter.com/sdether
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>
> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree
>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target
>> framework at 2.0?
>>
>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>> framework such as:
>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>> * Windows CE
>> * Compact Framework
>> * Windows Micro
>> * Windows Phone
>> * Mono compatibility?
>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
>> framework
>> - ...?
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Digy <di...@gmail.com>.
Correction:
(Having some hesitations about the future location of the Lucene.Net doesn't mean that I DON'T like some disciplines of ASF).
-----Original Message-----
From: Digy [mailto:digydigy@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:58 PM
To: 'lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org'
Subject: RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Hi Troy,
Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants.
In rarely cases, a new file is added to the project(or something that can change the solution/project file is done). If someone(event committer) has a change/bug that should be committed, he should send it to JIRA(or similar). After some discussions, there will always be a victim to make the actual commit.
(Having some hesitations about the future location of the Lucene.Net doesn't mean that I like some disciplines of ASF).
DIGY
-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:17 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Digy,
The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the files when
changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who opens the
VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end up with a
VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo he now
breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you are limiting
*committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there are
*very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
significant limiting factor to including new committers in development.
Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain references to the
csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're talking
about things like including the unit tests projects in the same solution, or
any other structure change that may occur that involved project level
changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be synced up.
There are also minor differences in the csproj files between versions, such
as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio versioning
information in the csproj metadata block.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> different versions of Visual Studio
> Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone can open.
>
> DIGY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> Digy,
>
> The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
>
> It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual Studio
> does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format (which IMO
> is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help developers a
> LOT).
>
> The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a solution
> file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
> version.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you want
> > and
> > then click to convert button?
> > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even in
> > 64bit).
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> >
> > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
> > headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't
> > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
> >
> > - Ben
> >
> > Chris wrote:
> > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
> > possible!
> > >
> > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > >
> > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> > > three environments.
> > >
> > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> > open
> > a
> > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > >>
> > >> Arne Claassen
> > >>
> > >> MindTouch
> > >> San Diego, CA
> > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > >>
> > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> > agree
> > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> > target
> > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > >>>
> > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> > >>> framework such as:
> > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > >>> * Windows CE
> > >>> * Compact Framework
> > >>> * Windows Micro
> > >>> * Windows Phone
> > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
> given
> > >>> framework
> > >>> - ...?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Chris
> > >>>
> > > >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Ciaran Roarty <ci...@gmail.com>.
I think the real question is which version do we want to target - seems like
.NET 2 is getting most traction; I'd be keener on 3.5 but I understand the
reticence to move. The dev environment is a question for the comitters to
decide who will ultimately be a subset of this discussion ( hopefully ).
Ciaran
On 5 November 2010 08:10, Simone Chiaretta <si...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I think having different sln has some downsides:
> first, you need to keep 3 version in sync.
> second, not only the sln file is different, but also the csproj file is
> different between 2k5 and 2k8.
>
> And I think it's not about real usefulness of the migration, is more about
> the perception: we do want the people to think Lucene.Net is something kept
> updated...
> If I see something still in VS2005 I wouldn't think so
>
> Simone
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 1:21 AM, Michael Neel <mi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think the project should first and foremost should work with the
> express
> > editions - these are free so there would be no barrier on tools. I may be
> > wrong, but I think the current source compiles just fine in VS Express.
> >
> > VS 2010 support targeting any framework version from 2.0 and up - if VS
> > 2010
> > Express is free and builds the project, what are the reasons for not
> > adopting 2010 going forward? Personally I'm still jumping between 2008
> and
> > 2010, but there is nothing so bad about 2010 that using it to build a
> class
> > library would be prohibitive. VS 2010 also supports Windows XP and up.
> >
> > The "everyone commits" issue becomes more important if the project is
> > updated to a DVCS. There it would be more common for an official
> developer
> > to grab another developers patch change set. I think. I'm still groking
> > DVCS.
> >
> > To the original question, I think Lucene.Net currently runs fine on mono
> > and
> > has several developers using it on mono. I don't have first hand
> > experience
> > with mono, this is just an impression from reading the list.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Digy,
> > >
> > > "Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants."
> > >
> > > I fully agree and *everyone* doesn't have to commit, but the point of
> > > conversation recently is that Lucene.Net needs new committers to stay
> > > vital.
> > > The solution files will be a problem for any new people joining the
> > > project,
> > > as most people that might want to join will be using later versions of
> > > Visual Studio. This of course will not be the entire community at
> large,
> > > and
> > > will follow the normal ASF processes for commits.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Troy
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Troy,
> > > >
> > > > Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants.
> > > >
> > > > In rarely cases, a new file is added to the project(or something that
> > can
> > > > change the solution/project file is done). If someone(event
> committer)
> > > has a
> > > > change/bug that should be committed, he should send it to JIRA(or
> > > similar).
> > > > After some discussions, there will always be a victim to make the
> > actual
> > > > commit.
> > > >
> > > > (Having some hesitations about the future location of the Lucene.Net
> > > > doesn't mean that I like some disciplines of ASF).
> > > >
> > > > DIGY
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:17 PM
> > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > >
> > > > Digy,
> > > >
> > > > The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the files
> > when
> > > > changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who opens
> > the
> > > > VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end up
> > with
> > > a
> > > > VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo he
> > now
> > > > breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
> > > >
> > > > So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you are
> > > > limiting
> > > > *committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there
> are
> > > > *very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
> > > > significant limiting factor to including new committers in
> development.
> > > >
> > > > Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain references
> to
> > > the
> > > > csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're
> > > talking
> > > > about things like including the unit tests projects in the same
> > solution,
> > > > or
> > > > any other structure change that may occur that involved project level
> > > > changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be synced
> up.
> > > >
> > > > There are also minor differences in the csproj files between
> versions,
> > > such
> > > > as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio versioning
> > > > information in the csproj metadata block.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Troy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be
> using
> > > > > different versions of Visual Studio
> > > > > Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone
> can
> > > > open.
> > > > >
> > > > > DIGY
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > >
> > > > > Digy,
> > > > >
> > > > > The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> > > > > different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual
> > > Studio
> > > > > does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format
> > (which
> > > > IMO
> > > > > is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help
> > > developers
> > > > a
> > > > > LOT).
> > > > >
> > > > > The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a
> > > solution
> > > > > file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a
> later
> > > > > version.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Troy
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version
> you
> > > > want
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > then click to convert button?
> > > > > > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted
> > frameworks(even
> > > in
> > > > > > 64bit).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > DIGY
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major
> > maintenance
> > > > > > headache since the list of files that make up the project really
> > > don't
> > > > > > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally
> > change.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Ben
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chris wrote:
> > > > > > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it
> > was
> > > > > > possible!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ________________________________________
> > > > > > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for
> > all
> > > > > > > three environments.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is
> > > there
> > > > > > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate
> > solution?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<
> > arnec@mindtouch.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can
> > > easily
> > > > > > open
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Arne Claassen
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> MindTouch
> > > > > > >> San Diego, CA
> > > > > > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does
> > > everyone
> > > > > > agree
> > > > > > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep
> > the
> > > > > > target
> > > > > > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the
> > > target
> > > > > > >>> framework such as:
> > > > > > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > > > > > >>> * Windows CE
> > > > > > >>> * Compact Framework
> > > > > > >>> * Windows Micro
> > > > > > >>> * Windows Phone
> > > > > > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > > > > > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in
> > the
> > > > > given
> > > > > > >>> framework
> > > > > > >>> - ...?
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Chris
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michael C. Neel (@ViNull)
> > http://www.ViNull.com <http://www.vinull.com/>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Simone Chiaretta
> Microsoft MVP ASP.NET <http://asp.net/> - ASPInsider
> Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> twitter: @simonech
>
> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> "Life is short, play hard"
>
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Moray McConnachie <mm...@oxford-analytica.com>.
I would not be in favour of a move to VS2010 without alternative
solution files. Such a move might be more appropriate for consideration
at a change of major version. If a change is needed now I say go to VS
2008 not 2010.
Yours,
Moray
-------------------------------------
Moray McConnachie
Director of IT +44 1865 261 600
Oxford Analytica http://www.oxan.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Simone Chiaretta [mailto:simone.chiaretta@gmail.com]
Sent: 05 November 2010 08:10
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
I think having different sln has some downsides:
first, you need to keep 3 version in sync.
second, not only the sln file is different, but also the csproj file is
different between 2k5 and 2k8.
And I think it's not about real usefulness of the migration, is more
about the perception: we do want the people to think Lucene.Net is
something kept updated...
If I see something still in VS2005 I wouldn't think so
Simone
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 1:21 AM, Michael Neel <mi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I think the project should first and foremost should work with the
> express editions - these are free so there would be no barrier on
> tools. I may be wrong, but I think the current source compiles just
fine in VS Express.
>
> VS 2010 support targeting any framework version from 2.0 and up - if
> VS 2010 Express is free and builds the project, what are the reasons
> for not adopting 2010 going forward? Personally I'm still jumping
> between 2008 and 2010, but there is nothing so bad about 2010 that
> using it to build a class library would be prohibitive. VS 2010 also
> supports Windows XP and up.
>
> The "everyone commits" issue becomes more important if the project is
> updated to a DVCS. There it would be more common for an official
> developer to grab another developers patch change set. I think. I'm
> still groking DVCS.
>
> To the original question, I think Lucene.Net currently runs fine on
> mono and has several developers using it on mono. I don't have first
> hand experience with mono, this is just an impression from reading the
> list.
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > Digy,
> >
> > "Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants."
> >
> > I fully agree and *everyone* doesn't have to commit, but the point
> > of conversation recently is that Lucene.Net needs new committers to
> > stay vital.
> > The solution files will be a problem for any new people joining the
> > project, as most people that might want to join will be using later
> > versions of Visual Studio. This of course will not be the entire
> > community at large, and will follow the normal ASF processes for
> > commits.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Troy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Troy,
> > >
> > > Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants.
> > >
> > > In rarely cases, a new file is added to the project(or something
> > > that
> can
> > > change the solution/project file is done). If someone(event
> > > committer)
> > has a
> > > change/bug that should be committed, he should send it to JIRA(or
> > similar).
> > > After some discussions, there will always be a victim to make the
> actual
> > > commit.
> > >
> > > (Having some hesitations about the future location of the
> > > Lucene.Net doesn't mean that I like some disciplines of ASF).
> > >
> > > DIGY
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:17 PM
> > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > >
> > > Digy,
> > >
> > > The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the
> > > files
> when
> > > changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who
> > > opens
> the
> > > VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end
> > > up
> with
> > a
> > > VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo
> > > he
> now
> > > breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
> > >
> > > So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you
> > > are limiting
> > > *committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there
> > > are
> > > *very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
> > > significant limiting factor to including new committers in
development.
> > >
> > > Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain
> > > references to
> > the
> > > csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're
> > talking
> > > about things like including the unit tests projects in the same
> solution,
> > > or
> > > any other structure change that may occur that involved project
> > > level changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be
synced up.
> > >
> > > There are also minor differences in the csproj files between
> > > versions,
> > such
> > > as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio
> > > versioning information in the csproj metadata block.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Troy
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be
> > > > > using
> > > > different versions of Visual Studio Yes, therefore it necessary
> > > > to use a common format that everyone can
> > > open.
> > > >
> > > > DIGY
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > >
> > > > Digy,
> > > >
> > > > The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
> > > >
> > > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be
> > > > using different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is
> > > > that Visual
> > Studio
> > > > does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format
> (which
> > > IMO
> > > > is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help
> > developers
> > > a
> > > > LOT).
> > > >
> > > > The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a
> > solution
> > > > file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a
> > > > later version.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Troy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS
> > > > > version you
> > > want
> > > > > and
> > > > > then click to convert button?
> > > > > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted
> frameworks(even
> > in
> > > > > 64bit).
> > > > >
> > > > > DIGY
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > >
> > > > > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major
> maintenance
> > > > > headache since the list of files that make up the project
> > > > > really
> > don't
> > > > > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally
> change.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Ben
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris wrote:
> > > > > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know
> > > > > > it
> was
> > > > > possible!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ________________________________________
> > > > > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file
> > > > > > for
> all
> > > > > > three environments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask
> > > > > > is
> > there
> > > > > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate
> solution?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<
> arnec@mindtouch.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I
> > > > > >> can
> > easily
> > > > > open
> > > > > a
> > > > > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Arne Claassen
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> MindTouch
> > > > > >> San Diego, CA
> > > > > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does
> > everyone
> > > > > agree
> > > > > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still
> > > > > >>> keep
> the
> > > > > target
> > > > > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading
> > > > > >>> the
> > target
> > > > > >>> framework such as:
> > > > > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such
as:
> > > > > >>> * Windows CE
> > > > > >>> * Compact Framework
> > > > > >>> * Windows Micro
> > > > > >>> * Windows Phone
> > > > > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > > > > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements
> > > > > >>> in
> the
> > > > given
> > > > > >>> framework
> > > > > >>> - ...?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Chris
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Michael C. Neel (@ViNull)
> http://www.ViNull.com
>
--
Simone Chiaretta
Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
twitter: @simonech
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
"Life is short, play hard"
---------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer
This message and any attachments are confidential and/or privileged. If this has been sent to you in error, please do not use, retain or disclose them, and contact the sender as soon as possible.
Oxford Analytica Ltd
Registered in England: No. 1196703
5 Alfred Street, Oxford
United Kingdom, OX1 4EH
---------------------------------------------------------
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Simone Chiaretta <si...@gmail.com>.
I think having different sln has some downsides:
first, you need to keep 3 version in sync.
second, not only the sln file is different, but also the csproj file is
different between 2k5 and 2k8.
And I think it's not about real usefulness of the migration, is more about
the perception: we do want the people to think Lucene.Net is something kept
updated...
If I see something still in VS2005 I wouldn't think so
Simone
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 1:21 AM, Michael Neel <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the project should first and foremost should work with the express
> editions - these are free so there would be no barrier on tools. I may be
> wrong, but I think the current source compiles just fine in VS Express.
>
> VS 2010 support targeting any framework version from 2.0 and up - if VS
> 2010
> Express is free and builds the project, what are the reasons for not
> adopting 2010 going forward? Personally I'm still jumping between 2008 and
> 2010, but there is nothing so bad about 2010 that using it to build a class
> library would be prohibitive. VS 2010 also supports Windows XP and up.
>
> The "everyone commits" issue becomes more important if the project is
> updated to a DVCS. There it would be more common for an official developer
> to grab another developers patch change set. I think. I'm still groking
> DVCS.
>
> To the original question, I think Lucene.Net currently runs fine on mono
> and
> has several developers using it on mono. I don't have first hand
> experience
> with mono, this is just an impression from reading the list.
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Digy,
> >
> > "Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants."
> >
> > I fully agree and *everyone* doesn't have to commit, but the point of
> > conversation recently is that Lucene.Net needs new committers to stay
> > vital.
> > The solution files will be a problem for any new people joining the
> > project,
> > as most people that might want to join will be using later versions of
> > Visual Studio. This of course will not be the entire community at large,
> > and
> > will follow the normal ASF processes for commits.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Troy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Troy,
> > >
> > > Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants.
> > >
> > > In rarely cases, a new file is added to the project(or something that
> can
> > > change the solution/project file is done). If someone(event committer)
> > has a
> > > change/bug that should be committed, he should send it to JIRA(or
> > similar).
> > > After some discussions, there will always be a victim to make the
> actual
> > > commit.
> > >
> > > (Having some hesitations about the future location of the Lucene.Net
> > > doesn't mean that I like some disciplines of ASF).
> > >
> > > DIGY
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:17 PM
> > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > >
> > > Digy,
> > >
> > > The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the files
> when
> > > changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who opens
> the
> > > VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end up
> with
> > a
> > > VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo he
> now
> > > breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
> > >
> > > So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you are
> > > limiting
> > > *committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there are
> > > *very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
> > > significant limiting factor to including new committers in development.
> > >
> > > Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain references to
> > the
> > > csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're
> > talking
> > > about things like including the unit tests projects in the same
> solution,
> > > or
> > > any other structure change that may occur that involved project level
> > > changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be synced up.
> > >
> > > There are also minor differences in the csproj files between versions,
> > such
> > > as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio versioning
> > > information in the csproj metadata block.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Troy
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> > > > different versions of Visual Studio
> > > > Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone can
> > > open.
> > > >
> > > > DIGY
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > >
> > > > Digy,
> > > >
> > > > The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
> > > >
> > > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> > > > different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual
> > Studio
> > > > does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format
> (which
> > > IMO
> > > > is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help
> > developers
> > > a
> > > > LOT).
> > > >
> > > > The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a
> > solution
> > > > file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
> > > > version.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Troy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you
> > > want
> > > > > and
> > > > > then click to convert button?
> > > > > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted
> frameworks(even
> > in
> > > > > 64bit).
> > > > >
> > > > > DIGY
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > >
> > > > > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major
> maintenance
> > > > > headache since the list of files that make up the project really
> > don't
> > > > > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally
> change.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Ben
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris wrote:
> > > > > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it
> was
> > > > > possible!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ________________________________________
> > > > > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for
> all
> > > > > > three environments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is
> > there
> > > > > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate
> solution?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<
> arnec@mindtouch.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can
> > easily
> > > > > open
> > > > > a
> > > > > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Arne Claassen
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> MindTouch
> > > > > >> San Diego, CA
> > > > > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does
> > everyone
> > > > > agree
> > > > > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep
> the
> > > > > target
> > > > > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the
> > target
> > > > > >>> framework such as:
> > > > > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > > > > >>> * Windows CE
> > > > > >>> * Compact Framework
> > > > > >>> * Windows Micro
> > > > > >>> * Windows Phone
> > > > > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > > > > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in
> the
> > > > given
> > > > > >>> framework
> > > > > >>> - ...?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Chris
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Michael C. Neel (@ViNull)
> http://www.ViNull.com
>
--
Simone Chiaretta
Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
twitter: @simonech
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
"Life is short, play hard"
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Michael Neel <mi...@gmail.com>.
I think the project should first and foremost should work with the express
editions - these are free so there would be no barrier on tools. I may be
wrong, but I think the current source compiles just fine in VS Express.
VS 2010 support targeting any framework version from 2.0 and up - if VS 2010
Express is free and builds the project, what are the reasons for not
adopting 2010 going forward? Personally I'm still jumping between 2008 and
2010, but there is nothing so bad about 2010 that using it to build a class
library would be prohibitive. VS 2010 also supports Windows XP and up.
The "everyone commits" issue becomes more important if the project is
updated to a DVCS. There it would be more common for an official developer
to grab another developers patch change set. I think. I'm still groking
DVCS.
To the original question, I think Lucene.Net currently runs fine on mono and
has several developers using it on mono. I don't have first hand experience
with mono, this is just an impression from reading the list.
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Digy,
>
> "Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants."
>
> I fully agree and *everyone* doesn't have to commit, but the point of
> conversation recently is that Lucene.Net needs new committers to stay
> vital.
> The solution files will be a problem for any new people joining the
> project,
> as most people that might want to join will be using later versions of
> Visual Studio. This of course will not be the entire community at large,
> and
> will follow the normal ASF processes for commits.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Troy,
> >
> > Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants.
> >
> > In rarely cases, a new file is added to the project(or something that can
> > change the solution/project file is done). If someone(event committer)
> has a
> > change/bug that should be committed, he should send it to JIRA(or
> similar).
> > After some discussions, there will always be a victim to make the actual
> > commit.
> >
> > (Having some hesitations about the future location of the Lucene.Net
> > doesn't mean that I like some disciplines of ASF).
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:17 PM
> > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> >
> > Digy,
> >
> > The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the files when
> > changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who opens the
> > VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end up with
> a
> > VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo he now
> > breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
> >
> > So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you are
> > limiting
> > *committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there are
> > *very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
> > significant limiting factor to including new committers in development.
> >
> > Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain references to
> the
> > csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're
> talking
> > about things like including the unit tests projects in the same solution,
> > or
> > any other structure change that may occur that involved project level
> > changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be synced up.
> >
> > There are also minor differences in the csproj files between versions,
> such
> > as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio versioning
> > information in the csproj metadata block.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Troy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> > > different versions of Visual Studio
> > > Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone can
> > open.
> > >
> > > DIGY
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > >
> > > Digy,
> > >
> > > The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
> > >
> > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> > > different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual
> Studio
> > > does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format (which
> > IMO
> > > is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help
> developers
> > a
> > > LOT).
> > >
> > > The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a
> solution
> > > file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
> > > version.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Troy
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you
> > want
> > > > and
> > > > then click to convert button?
> > > > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even
> in
> > > > 64bit).
> > > >
> > > > DIGY
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > >
> > > > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
> > > > headache since the list of files that make up the project really
> don't
> > > > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
> > > >
> > > > - Ben
> > > >
> > > > Chris wrote:
> > > > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
> > > > possible!
> > > > >
> > > > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________________
> > > > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > > >
> > > > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> > > > > three environments.
> > > > >
> > > > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is
> there
> > > > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can
> easily
> > > > open
> > > > a
> > > > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Arne Claassen
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MindTouch
> > > > >> San Diego, CA
> > > > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does
> everyone
> > > > agree
> > > > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> > > > target
> > > > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the
> target
> > > > >>> framework such as:
> > > > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > > > >>> * Windows CE
> > > > >>> * Compact Framework
> > > > >>> * Windows Micro
> > > > >>> * Windows Phone
> > > > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > > > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
> > > given
> > > > >>> framework
> > > > >>> - ...?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Chris
> > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
Michael C. Neel (@ViNull)
http://www.ViNull.com
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Digy,
"Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants."
I fully agree and *everyone* doesn't have to commit, but the point of
conversation recently is that Lucene.Net needs new committers to stay vital.
The solution files will be a problem for any new people joining the project,
as most people that might want to join will be using later versions of
Visual Studio. This of course will not be the entire community at large, and
will follow the normal ASF processes for commits.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Troy,
>
> Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants.
>
> In rarely cases, a new file is added to the project(or something that can
> change the solution/project file is done). If someone(event committer) has a
> change/bug that should be committed, he should send it to JIRA(or similar).
> After some discussions, there will always be a victim to make the actual
> commit.
>
> (Having some hesitations about the future location of the Lucene.Net
> doesn't mean that I like some disciplines of ASF).
>
> DIGY
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:17 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> Digy,
>
> The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the files when
> changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who opens the
> VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end up with a
> VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo he now
> breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
>
> So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you are
> limiting
> *committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there are
> *very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
> significant limiting factor to including new committers in development.
>
> Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain references to the
> csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're talking
> about things like including the unit tests projects in the same solution,
> or
> any other structure change that may occur that involved project level
> changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be synced up.
>
> There are also minor differences in the csproj files between versions, such
> as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio versioning
> information in the csproj metadata block.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> > different versions of Visual Studio
> > Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone can
> open.
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> >
> > Digy,
> >
> > The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
> >
> > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> > different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual Studio
> > does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format (which
> IMO
> > is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help developers
> a
> > LOT).
> >
> > The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a solution
> > file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
> > version.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Troy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you
> want
> > > and
> > > then click to convert button?
> > > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even in
> > > 64bit).
> > >
> > > DIGY
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > >
> > > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
> > > headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't
> > > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
> > >
> > > - Ben
> > >
> > > Chris wrote:
> > > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
> > > possible!
> > > >
> > > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________________
> > > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > > >
> > > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> > > > three environments.
> > > >
> > > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> > > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> > > open
> > > a
> > > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > > >>
> > > >> Arne Claassen
> > > >>
> > > >> MindTouch
> > > >> San Diego, CA
> > > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > > >>
> > > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> > > agree
> > > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> > > target
> > > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> > > >>> framework such as:
> > > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > > >>> * Windows CE
> > > >>> * Compact Framework
> > > >>> * Windows Micro
> > > >>> * Windows Phone
> > > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
> > given
> > > >>> framework
> > > >>> - ...?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Chris
> > > >>>
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Digy <di...@gmail.com>.
Hi Troy,
Everyone shouldn't have to commit whenever he wants.
In rarely cases, a new file is added to the project(or something that can change the solution/project file is done). If someone(event committer) has a change/bug that should be committed, he should send it to JIRA(or similar). After some discussions, there will always be a victim to make the actual commit.
(Having some hesitations about the future location of the Lucene.Net doesn't mean that I like some disciplines of ASF).
DIGY
-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:17 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Digy,
The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the files when
changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who opens the
VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end up with a
VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo he now
breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you are limiting
*committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there are
*very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
significant limiting factor to including new committers in development.
Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain references to the
csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're talking
about things like including the unit tests projects in the same solution, or
any other structure change that may occur that involved project level
changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be synced up.
There are also minor differences in the csproj files between versions, such
as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio versioning
information in the csproj metadata block.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> different versions of Visual Studio
> Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone can open.
>
> DIGY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> Digy,
>
> The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
>
> It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual Studio
> does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format (which IMO
> is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help developers a
> LOT).
>
> The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a solution
> file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
> version.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you want
> > and
> > then click to convert button?
> > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even in
> > 64bit).
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> >
> > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
> > headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't
> > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
> >
> > - Ben
> >
> > Chris wrote:
> > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
> > possible!
> > >
> > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > >
> > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> > > three environments.
> > >
> > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> > open
> > a
> > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > >>
> > >> Arne Claassen
> > >>
> > >> MindTouch
> > >> San Diego, CA
> > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > >>
> > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> > agree
> > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> > target
> > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > >>>
> > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> > >>> framework such as:
> > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > >>> * Windows CE
> > >>> * Compact Framework
> > >>> * Windows Micro
> > >>> * Windows Phone
> > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
> given
> > >>> framework
> > >>> - ...?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Chris
> > >>>
> > > >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Digy,
The issue is not *opening* the files, but rather *saving* the files when
changes are made. This is the problematic use case. A user who opens the
VS2005 file in VS2010 and then modifies it and saves it will end up with a
VS2010 formatted file. When he commits that files back to the repo he now
breaks the ability for users who have VS2005 to open the solution.
So in effect, by only having a single VS2005 solution file, you are limiting
*committers* to only use VS2005 to make changes. I would say there are
*very* few people in the market who still use VS2005, so this is a
significant limiting factor to including new committers in development.
Wyatt is correct that the solution files primary contain references to the
csproj files which hold the actual file by file data, but if we're talking
about things like including the unit tests projects in the same solution, or
any other structure change that may occur that involved project level
changes, then the solution files themselves would need to be synced up.
There are also minor differences in the csproj files between versions, such
as changes in attribute names and inclusion of VS studio versioning
information in the csproj metadata block.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> different versions of Visual Studio
> Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone can open.
>
> DIGY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> Digy,
>
> The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
>
> It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
> different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual Studio
> does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format (which IMO
> is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help developers a
> LOT).
>
> The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a solution
> file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
> version.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you want
> > and
> > then click to convert button?
> > You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even in
> > 64bit).
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> >
> > I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
> > headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't
> > change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
> >
> > - Ben
> >
> > Chris wrote:
> > > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
> > possible!
> > >
> > > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> > >
> > > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> > > three environments.
> > >
> > > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> > > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> > open
> > a
> > >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> > >>
> > >> Arne Claassen
> > >>
> > >> MindTouch
> > >> San Diego, CA
> > >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> > >>
> > >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> > agree
> > >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> > target
> > >>> framework at 2.0?
> > >>>
> > >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> > >>> framework such as:
> > >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> > >>> * Windows CE
> > >>> * Compact Framework
> > >>> * Windows Micro
> > >>> * Windows Phone
> > >>> * Mono compatibility?
> > >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
> given
> > >>> framework
> > >>> - ...?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Chris
> > >>>
> > > >
> >
> >
>
>
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Digy <di...@gmail.com>.
> It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using different versions of Visual Studio
Yes, therefore it necessary to use a common format that everyone can open.
DIGY
-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:04 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Digy,
The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual Studio
does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format (which IMO
is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help developers a
LOT).
The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a solution
file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
version.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you want
> and
> then click to convert button?
> You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even in
> 64bit).
>
> DIGY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
> headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't
> change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
>
> - Ben
>
> Chris wrote:
> > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
> possible!
> >
> > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> >
> > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> > three environments.
> >
> > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com>
> wrote:
> >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> open
> a
> >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> >>
> >> Arne Claassen
> >>
> >> MindTouch
> >> San Diego, CA
> >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> >>
> >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> agree
> >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> target
> >>> framework at 2.0?
> >>>
> >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> >>> framework such as:
> >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> >>> * Windows CE
> >>> * Compact Framework
> >>> * Windows Micro
> >>> * Windows Phone
> >>> * Mono compatibility?
> >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
> >>> framework
> >>> - ...?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Chris
> >>>
> > >
>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Digy,
The issue is not about opening and compiling the solution.
It's about managing the fact that different committers may be using
different versions of Visual Studio. The real issue is that Visual Studio
does not have the feature to save to a previous version's format (which IMO
is really dumb.. This is relatively easy to do, and would help developers a
LOT).
The main scenario that is not supported is easily maintaining a solution
file for an earlier version of Visual Studio while working in a later
version.
Thanks,
Troy
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Digy <di...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you want
> and
> then click to convert button?
> You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even in
> 64bit).
>
> DIGY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
> headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't
> change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
>
> - Ben
>
> Chris wrote:
> > I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
> possible!
> >
> > Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
> >
> > Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> > three environments.
> >
> > While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> > any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com>
> wrote:
> >> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
> open
> a
> >> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
> >>
> >> Arne Claassen
> >>
> >> MindTouch
> >> San Diego, CA
> >> http://twitter.com/sdether
> >>
> >> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> agree
> >>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the
> target
> >>> framework at 2.0?
> >>>
> >>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> >>> framework such as:
> >>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> >>> * Windows CE
> >>> * Compact Framework
> >>> * Windows Micro
> >>> * Windows Phone
> >>> * Mono compatibility?
> >>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
> >>> framework
> >>> - ...?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Chris
> >>>
> > >
>
>
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Digy <di...@gmail.com>.
What is so hard in opening the solution in whichever VS version you want and
then click to convert button?
You do it once, and Lucene.Net works in all targeted frameworks(even in
64bit).
DIGY
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Martz [mailto:benmartz@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 9:43 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance
headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't
change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
- Ben
Chris wrote:
> I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was
possible!
>
> Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> three environments.
>
> While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com> wrote:
>> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily open
a
>> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>>
>> Arne Claassen
>>
>> MindTouch
>> San Diego, CA
>> http://twitter.com/sdether
>>
>> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>>
>>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree
>>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target
>>> framework at 2.0?
>>>
>>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>>> framework such as:
>>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>>> * Windows CE
>>> * Compact Framework
>>> * Windows Micro
>>> * Windows Phone
>>> * Mono compatibility?
>>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
>>> framework
>>> - ...?
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
> >
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Ben Martz <be...@gmail.com>.
I like this idea. I don't think it would cause any major maintenance headache since the list of files that make up the project really don't change on a regular basis - only the contents would normally change.
- Ben
Chris wrote:
> I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was possible!
>
> Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
>
> Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
> three environments.
>
> While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
> any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen<ar...@mindtouch.com> wrote:
>> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily open a
>> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>>
>> Arne Claassen
>>
>> MindTouch
>> San Diego, CA
>> http://twitter.com/sdether
>>
>> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>>
>>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree
>>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target
>>> framework at 2.0?
>>>
>>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>>> framework such as:
>>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>>> * Windows CE
>>> * Compact Framework
>>> * Windows Micro
>>> * Windows Phone
>>> * Mono compatibility?
>>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
>>> framework
>>> - ...?
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
> >
RE: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Chris <La...@dcpromo.com>.
I like the idea of having multiple *.sln's ... I didn't know it was possible!
Integrating the unit tests seems like a Best Practice too.
________________________________________
From: Wyatt Barnett [wyatt.barnett@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 12:37 PM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
three environments.
While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily open a
> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>
> Arne Claassen
>
> MindTouch
> San Diego, CA
> http://twitter.com/sdether
>
> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>
>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree
>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target
>> framework at 2.0?
>>
>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>> framework such as:
>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>> * Windows CE
>> * Compact Framework
>> * Windows Micro
>> * Windows Phone
>> * Mono compatibility?
>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
>> framework
>> - ...?
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Wyatt Barnett <wy...@gmail.com>.
Lunatic fringe here -- no reason we can't have a .sln file for all
three environments.
While we are talking solution files and such, I'll also ask is there
any particular reason why the tests project is a separate solution?
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily open a
> VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
>
> Arne Claassen
>
> MindTouch
> San Diego, CA
> http://twitter.com/sdether
>
> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
>
>> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree
>> that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target
>> framework at 2.0?
>>
>> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
>> framework such as:
>> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
>> * Windows CE
>> * Compact Framework
>> * Windows Micro
>> * Windows Phone
>> * Mono compatibility?
>> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given
>> framework
>> - ...?
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Arne Claassen <ar...@mindtouch.com>.
I'd prefer if we didn't. My primary dev is still VS2k8. I can easily
open a VS2k5 solution, but of a VS2k10 is basically unusable.
Arne Claassen
MindTouch
San Diego, CA
http://twitter.com/sdether
On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Chris wrote:
> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone
> agree that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep
> the target framework at 2.0?
>
> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target
> framework such as:
> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> * Windows CE
> * Compact Framework
> * Windows Micro
> * Windows Phone
> * Mono compatibility?
> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the
> given framework
> - ...?
>
>
> Chris
>
Re: Agree to upgrade to VS2010?
Posted by Heath Aldrich <ha...@aes2.com>.
I have no problem with the 2010 move but I think the 2.0 framework makes sense.
On Nov 4, 2010, at 2:27 PM, "Chris" <La...@dcpromo.com> wrote:
> Just to put some movement behind a common sentiment, does everyone agree that the project should be upgraded to VS2010, and still keep the target framework at 2.0?
>
> I think we should consider a few things before upgrading the target framework such as:
> - Do we want Lucene.NET to run on multiple platforms such as:
> * Windows CE
> * Compact Framework
> * Windows Micro
> * Windows Phone
> * Mono compatibility?
> - Are we going to take advantage of language enhancements in the given framework
> - ...?
>
>
> Chris
>