You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com> on 2015/03/25 18:17:03 UTC
Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Hi,
I'd like to create the 5.1 branch soon'ish, thinking maybe late tomorrow or
early Friday.
If I understand correctly, that implies that new features should not be
added after that point without some agreement among the committers about
whether it should be included?
Let me know if this is too soon and when a more ideal date/time would be.
Sincerely,
Your friendly 5.1 release manager (aka thelabdude)
Re: Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Posted by Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com>.
No problem, thanks for letting us know the timing ;-)
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Timothy,
>
> We have an issue with auto caching in Lucene that uncovered some
> issues with using queries as cache keys since some of them are mutable
> (including major one like BooleanQuery and PhraseQuery). I reopened
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6303 and provided a patch
> to disable this feature so that we can release. I can hopefully commit
> it early next week.
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to create the 5.1 branch soon'ish, thinking maybe late tomorrow
> or
> > early Friday.
> >
> > If I understand correctly, that implies that new features should not be
> > added after that point without some agreement among the committers about
> > whether it should be included?
> >
> > Let me know if this is too soon and when a more ideal date/time would be.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Your friendly 5.1 release manager (aka thelabdude)
>
>
>
> --
> Adrien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Posted by Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com>.
I'd like to move ahead an create the 5.1 branch later today so that we can
start locking down what's included in the release. I know this adds an
extra merge step for you Adrien for LUCENE-6303, but I hope that's not too
much trouble for you?
Cheers,
Tim
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Timothy,
>
> We have an issue with auto caching in Lucene that uncovered some
> issues with using queries as cache keys since some of them are mutable
> (including major one like BooleanQuery and PhraseQuery). I reopened
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6303 and provided a patch
> to disable this feature so that we can release. I can hopefully commit
> it early next week.
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to create the 5.1 branch soon'ish, thinking maybe late tomorrow
> or
> > early Friday.
> >
> > If I understand correctly, that implies that new features should not be
> > added after that point without some agreement among the committers about
> > whether it should be included?
> >
> > Let me know if this is too soon and when a more ideal date/time would be.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Your friendly 5.1 release manager (aka thelabdude)
>
>
>
> --
> Adrien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Posted by Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com>.
Hi Timothy,
We have an issue with auto caching in Lucene that uncovered some
issues with using queries as cache keys since some of them are mutable
(including major one like BooleanQuery and PhraseQuery). I reopened
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6303 and provided a patch
to disable this feature so that we can release. I can hopefully commit
it early next week.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to create the 5.1 branch soon'ish, thinking maybe late tomorrow or
> early Friday.
>
> If I understand correctly, that implies that new features should not be
> added after that point without some agreement among the committers about
> whether it should be included?
>
> Let me know if this is too soon and when a more ideal date/time would be.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Your friendly 5.1 release manager (aka thelabdude)
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Posted by Shawn Heisey <ap...@elyograg.org>.
On 3/25/2015 11:30 AM, Steve Molloy wrote:
> I think something should be done about SOLR-7296 before releasing.
> IMHO, having 2 implementations and completely unrelated APIs for
> facetting is asking for problems down the road. So before exposing
> this publicly, we should either align implementation or at least the
> dev group needs to consciously make the decision to move ahead with
> this, understanding the drawbacks.
Replying without understanding any of the facet code or how each
implementation differs from the others:
Because this has a heavy impact on low-level API code, I doubt that we
can get this into 5.1. It might even be disruptive enough that we'll
fork trunk into an issue-specific branch, do the heavy lifting, commit
to trunk, and then backport after a suitable baking period.
Thanks,
Shawn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Posted by Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com>.
Sorry - I didn't intend any offense with the precedent statement, only the
fact that SOLR-6348 has released features already, namely SOLR-6351 and
SOLR-6354 are in 5.0 already.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Yonik Seeley <ys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > That could be months of haggling and I don't think we should hold up all
> the
> > other nice features, improvements, and bug fixes for too much longer as
> we
> > don't want to slow down adoption of 5.x
>
> +1
>
> > Without any judgement of what was done in SOLR-7214 and given that
> SOLR-6348
> > has precedent,
>
> I'll disagree with the precedent bit... I worked on this stuff (and
> presented it at ApacheCon) long before SOLR-6348 was opened.
>
> > why not mark the new JSON API as experimental, giving us
> > freedom to unify the approaches over the next several releases?
>
> +1 for experimental - that had been my (uncommunicated) plan anyway.
> We don't want to lock down APIs prematurely, it's really important to
> get them right!
>
> -Yonik
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Posted by Yonik Seeley <ys...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That could be months of haggling and I don't think we should hold up all the
> other nice features, improvements, and bug fixes for too much longer as we
> don't want to slow down adoption of 5.x
+1
> Without any judgement of what was done in SOLR-7214 and given that SOLR-6348
> has precedent,
I'll disagree with the precedent bit... I worked on this stuff (and
presented it at ApacheCon) long before SOLR-6348 was opened.
> why not mark the new JSON API as experimental, giving us
> freedom to unify the approaches over the next several releases?
+1 for experimental - that had been my (uncommunicated) plan anyway.
We don't want to lock down APIs prematurely, it's really important to
get them right!
-Yonik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
Posted by Timothy Potter <th...@gmail.com>.
That could be months of haggling and I don't think we should hold up all
the other nice features, improvements, and bug fixes for too much longer as
we don't want to slow down adoption of 5.x
Without any judgement of what was done in SOLR-7214 and given that
SOLR-6348 has precedent, why not mark the new JSON API as experimental,
giving us freedom to unify the approaches over the next several releases?
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Steve Molloy <sm...@opentext.com> wrote:
> I think something should be done about SOLR-7296 before releasing. IMHO,
> having 2 implementations and completely unrelated APIs for facetting is
> asking for problems down the road. So before exposing this publicly, we
> should either align implementation or at least the dev group needs to
> consciously make the decision to move ahead with this, understanding the
> drawbacks.
>
> Steve
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Timothy Potter [thelabdude@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* March 25, 2015 1:17 PM
> *To:* lucene dev
> *Subject:* Creating 5.1 branch soon ...
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to create the 5.1 branch soon'ish, thinking maybe late tomorrow
> or early Friday.
>
> If I understand correctly, that implies that new features should not be
> added after that point without some agreement among the committers about
> whether it should be included?
>
> Let me know if this is too soon and when a more ideal date/time would be.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Your friendly 5.1 release manager (aka thelabdude)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org