You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@lucenenet.apache.org by George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> on 2006/11/28 05:10:14 UTC
Lucene.Net 2.0 "beta" build 002 and Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final" build 004 are released
Hi folks,
I just released Lucene.Net 2.0 and 1.9.1. Here are the details for each of
those releases:
Lucene.Net.2.0 build 002 "Beta"
- Lucene.Net.Demo.SearchFiles.cs -- parted new code
- Lucene.Net.Index.SegmentReader.Get() -- changed Exception to
SystemException
- Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method (to fix
sort memory leak defect)
- Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method (to
fix sort memory leak defect)
- Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close() method
(to fix sort memory leak defect)
- Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method (to
fix sort memory leak defect)
- Lucene.Net.Search.MatchAllDocsQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
methods
- Lucene.Net.Search.MultiPhraseQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
methods
- Lucene.Net.Search.PrefixQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
methods
- Lucene.Net.Search.RangeQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
methods
- Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid the
use of exception throwing
- Issues:
Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalMultiSearcherSort -- NUnit test
FAILS
- Issues: Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalSort -- NUnit
test FAILS
I am ready to label Lucene.Net 2.0 as "final" once I get a handle on the two
NUnit tests that are failing. I believe they are failing due to a defect in
the test code of Lucene.Net and not the core code. If anyone got the cycles
to look into this, please let me know. I like to finalize this 2.0 release
so we can move on to start supporting .NET 2.0 and other Lucene port to C#.
Please start using 2.0 and let me know of any issues.
And now the release note for Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final".
Lucene.Net.1.9.1 build 004 "final"
- Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid the
use of exception throwing
- Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method (to fix
sort memory leak defect)
- Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method (to
fix sort memory leak defect)
- Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close() method
(to fix sort memory leak defect)
- Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method (to
fix sort memory leak defect)
I don't want to touch this release any more unless if there is a critical
defect such as index corruption, etc.
Best regards,
-- George Aroush
Re: Lucene.Net 2.0 "beta" build 002 and Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final" build 004 are released
Posted by Jon Gohr <jo...@gmail.com>.
Glad to be of even the tiniest little bit of help. Thanks for fixing the
zip. I'll download and check it out right away.
On 11/28/06, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
>
> Good catch! And Thanks for being the first to download this release.
>
> I just check-in a new ZIP which has the right source code.
>
> -- George Aroush
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Gohr [mailto:jongohr@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:06 PM
> To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lucene.Net 2.0 "beta" build 002 and Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final"
> build 004 are released
>
> Hi,
>
> I downloaded the 1.9.1 build 004 zip from the apache site and was
> wondering
> if the correct zip package got released?
>
> The project file says Lucene.Net-1.9.rc1.csproj where the 1.9.1 build 003
> says Lucene.Net-1.9.1.csproj.
>
> Most/All(?) of the file dates appear to be older than the build 003 file
> dates as well.
>
> Thanks for any clarification you can provide!
>
> On 11/27/06, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I just released Lucene.Net 2.0 and 1.9.1. Here are the details for
> > each of those releases:
> >
> > Lucene.Net.2.0 build 002 "Beta"
> > - Lucene.Net.Demo.SearchFiles.cs -- parted new code
> > - Lucene.Net.Index.SegmentReader.Get() -- changed Exception to
> > SystemException
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method
> > (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method
> > (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close()
> > method (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method
> > (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.MatchAllDocsQuery.Clone() -- removed this
> > unused methods
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.MultiPhraseQuery.Clone() -- removed this
> > unused methods
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.PrefixQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
> > methods
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.RangeQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
> > methods
> > - Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid
> > the use of exception throwing
> > - Issues:
> > Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalMultiSearcherSort -- NUnit
> > test FAILS
> > - Issues: Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalSort --
> > NUnit test FAILS
> >
> > I am ready to label Lucene.Net 2.0 as "final" once I get a handle on
> > the two NUnit tests that are failing. I believe they are failing due
> > to a defect in the test code of Lucene.Net and not the core code. If
> > anyone got the cycles to look into this, please let me know. I like
> > to finalize this 2.0release so we can move on to start supporting .NET
> > 2.0 and other Lucene port to C#.
> >
> > Please start using 2.0 and let me know of any issues.
> >
> > And now the release note for Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final".
> >
> > Lucene.Net.1.9.1 build 004 "final"
> > - Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid
> > the use of exception throwing
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method
> > (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method
> > (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close()
> > method (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> > - Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method
> > (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> >
> > I don't want to touch this release any more unless if there is a
> > critical defect such as index corruption, etc.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > -- George Aroush
> >
> >
>
>
RE: Lucene.Net 2.0 "beta" build 002 and Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final" build 004 are released
Posted by George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net>.
Good catch! And Thanks for being the first to download this release.
I just check-in a new ZIP which has the right source code.
-- George Aroush
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Gohr [mailto:jongohr@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:06 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene.Net 2.0 "beta" build 002 and Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final"
build 004 are released
Hi,
I downloaded the 1.9.1 build 004 zip from the apache site and was wondering
if the correct zip package got released?
The project file says Lucene.Net-1.9.rc1.csproj where the 1.9.1 build 003
says Lucene.Net-1.9.1.csproj.
Most/All(?) of the file dates appear to be older than the build 003 file
dates as well.
Thanks for any clarification you can provide!
On 11/27/06, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I just released Lucene.Net 2.0 and 1.9.1. Here are the details for
> each of those releases:
>
> Lucene.Net.2.0 build 002 "Beta"
> - Lucene.Net.Demo.SearchFiles.cs -- parted new code
> - Lucene.Net.Index.SegmentReader.Get() -- changed Exception to
> SystemException
> - Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close()
> method (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.MatchAllDocsQuery.Clone() -- removed this
> unused methods
> - Lucene.Net.Search.MultiPhraseQuery.Clone() -- removed this
> unused methods
> - Lucene.Net.Search.PrefixQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
> methods
> - Lucene.Net.Search.RangeQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
> methods
> - Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid
> the use of exception throwing
> - Issues:
> Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalMultiSearcherSort -- NUnit
> test FAILS
> - Issues: Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalSort --
> NUnit test FAILS
>
> I am ready to label Lucene.Net 2.0 as "final" once I get a handle on
> the two NUnit tests that are failing. I believe they are failing due
> to a defect in the test code of Lucene.Net and not the core code. If
> anyone got the cycles to look into this, please let me know. I like
> to finalize this 2.0release so we can move on to start supporting .NET
> 2.0 and other Lucene port to C#.
>
> Please start using 2.0 and let me know of any issues.
>
> And now the release note for Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final".
>
> Lucene.Net.1.9.1 build 004 "final"
> - Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid
> the use of exception throwing
> - Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close()
> method (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
>
> I don't want to touch this release any more unless if there is a
> critical defect such as index corruption, etc.
>
> Best regards,
>
> -- George Aroush
>
>
Re: Lucene.Net 2.0 "beta" build 002 and Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final" build 004 are released
Posted by Jon Gohr <jo...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I downloaded the 1.9.1 build 004 zip from the apache site and was wondering
if the correct zip package got released?
The project file says Lucene.Net-1.9.rc1.csproj where the 1.9.1 build 003
says Lucene.Net-1.9.1.csproj.
Most/All(?) of the file dates appear to be older than the build 003 file
dates as well.
Thanks for any clarification you can provide!
On 11/27/06, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I just released Lucene.Net 2.0 and 1.9.1. Here are the details for each
> of
> those releases:
>
> Lucene.Net.2.0 build 002 "Beta"
> - Lucene.Net.Demo.SearchFiles.cs -- parted new code
> - Lucene.Net.Index.SegmentReader.Get() -- changed Exception to
> SystemException
> - Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method (to
> fix
> sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method (to
> fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method (to
> fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.MatchAllDocsQuery.Clone() -- removed this
> unused
> methods
> - Lucene.Net.Search.MultiPhraseQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
> methods
> - Lucene.Net.Search.PrefixQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
> methods
> - Lucene.Net.Search.RangeQuery.Clone() -- removed this unused
> methods
> - Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid the
> use of exception throwing
> - Issues:
> Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalMultiSearcherSort -- NUnit
> test
> FAILS
> - Issues: Lucene.Net.Search.TestSort.TestInternationalSort -- NUnit
> test FAILS
>
> I am ready to label Lucene.Net 2.0 as "final" once I get a handle on the
> two
> NUnit tests that are failing. I believe they are failing due to a defect
> in
> the test code of Lucene.Net and not the core code. If anyone got the
> cycles
> to look into this, please let me know. I like to finalize this 2.0release
> so we can move on to start supporting .NET 2.0 and other Lucene port to
> C#.
>
> Please start using 2.0 and let me know of any issues.
>
> And now the release note for Lucene.Net 1.9.1 "final".
>
> Lucene.Net.1.9.1 build 004 "final"
> - Lucene.Net.Index.FieldInfos.FieldName()/FieldInfo() -- avoid the
> use of exception throwing
> - Lucene.Net.Search.StringIndex.cs -- added a Close() method (to
> fix
> sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldCacheImpl.cs -- added a Close() method (to
> fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.FieldSortHitQueue.cs -- added a Close() method
> (to fix sort memory leak defect)
> - Lucene.Net.Search.IndexSearcher.cs -- added a Close() method (to
> fix sort memory leak defect)
>
> I don't want to touch this release any more unless if there is a critical
> defect such as index corruption, etc.
>
> Best regards,
>
> -- George Aroush
>
>
Re: Lucene.Net 2.0
Posted by Andy Berryman <to...@gmail.com>.
As a general note to the community out there ... If your needs require a
higher version of the .NET Framework than the current version of
Lucene.Netthat you are working on ... You can always get the code and
compile on that
newer version of the .NET Framework. I highly doubt that you'll run into
problems.
I'm currently running a massive search project on version 1.9.1 Build 4 that
I compiled on the .NET 2.0 Framework. I did this for the improved memory
management and garbage collection of the .NET 2.0 Framework. No problems at
all. During my next major release cycle I plan on moving to Lucene.Netversion
2.0 but have no real need to rush that upgrade.
So for those interested in the .NET 3.0 Framework ... You ought to be able
to proceed without too much trouble. But like Michael mentioned earlier ...
.NET 3.0 is just some added bells and whistles to 2.0.
Andy
On 1/9/07, Joe Shaw <jo...@novell.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 09:56 -0800, Michael Paine wrote:
> > NET 3.0 is really just .NET 2.0 with UI, communications (web services)
> and
> > workflow fluff.
>
> It's also the new LINQ syntax in C#.
>
> I'd ask that you please *not* move to .NET 3.0 yet, as it's not well
> deployed, and Mono doesn't yet support it. 2.0 is okay though, IMO.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
RE: Lucene.Net 2.0
Posted by George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net>.
Hi Everyone,
I just want to express my opinion too that I don't believe we should jump to
.NET 2.0 for the reasons already pointed out.
Regards,
-- George
-----Original Message-----
From: michael@justanswer.com [mailto:michael@justanswer.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:53 PM
To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Lucene.Net 2.0
LINQ syntax isn't part of .NET 3.0 but rather part of C# 3.0:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa663314.aspx
Q: Will C# 3.0, VB.NET 9.0, Atlas, or Linq be included in the .NET Framework
3.0?
A: No, these features are planned for future releases of the .NET Framework.
The .NET Framework 3.0 includes only the technology formerly described as
WinFX.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Shaw [mailto:joeshaw@novell.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 11:44 AM
To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Lucene.Net 2.0
Hi,
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 09:56 -0800, Michael Paine wrote:
> NET 3.0 is really just .NET 2.0 with UI, communications (web services)
> and workflow fluff.
It's also the new LINQ syntax in C#.
I'd ask that you please *not* move to .NET 3.0 yet, as it's not well
deployed, and Mono doesn't yet support it. 2.0 is okay though, IMO.
Joe
RE: Lucene.Net 2.0
Posted by mi...@justanswer.com.
LINQ syntax isn't part of .NET 3.0 but rather part of C# 3.0:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa663314.aspx
Q: Will C# 3.0, VB.NET 9.0, Atlas, or Linq be included in the .NET Framework
3.0?
A: No, these features are planned for future releases of the .NET Framework.
The .NET Framework 3.0 includes only the technology formerly described as
WinFX.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Shaw [mailto:joeshaw@novell.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 11:44 AM
To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Lucene.Net 2.0
Hi,
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 09:56 -0800, Michael Paine wrote:
> NET 3.0 is really just .NET 2.0 with UI, communications (web services)
> and workflow fluff.
It's also the new LINQ syntax in C#.
I'd ask that you please *not* move to .NET 3.0 yet, as it's not well
deployed, and Mono doesn't yet support it. 2.0 is okay though, IMO.
Joe
RE: Lucene.Net 2.0
Posted by Joe Shaw <jo...@novell.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 09:56 -0800, Michael Paine wrote:
> NET 3.0 is really just .NET 2.0 with UI, communications (web services) and
> workflow fluff.
It's also the new LINQ syntax in C#.
I'd ask that you please *not* move to .NET 3.0 yet, as it's not well
deployed, and Mono doesn't yet support it. 2.0 is okay though, IMO.
Joe
RE: Lucene.Net 2.0
Posted by Michael Paine <mi...@justanswer.com>.
.NET 3.0 is really just .NET 2.0 with UI, communications (web services) and
workflow fluff.
-----Original Message-----
From: news [mailto:news@sea.gmane.org] On Behalf Of HP-IT
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:10 AM
To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene.Net 2.0
Hey George,
wouldn't it be the time to swap to .NET 3.0 instead to start now(!) to
support .NET 2.0?!
best regards
Re: Lucene.Net 2.0
Posted by HP-IT <he...@yahoo.de>.
Hey George,
wouldn't it be the time to swap to .NET 3.0 instead to start now(!) to
support .NET 2.0?!
best regards