You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucenenet.apache.org by Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com> on 2012/02/04 19:03:26 UTC
RE: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
So, Chris if you did this as a direct port of the java version (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/), Does that mean that all of the LUCENE JIRA issues (https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+LUCENE+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide) are part of this code already? That would make 3.0.3 well on it's way to release... ~P
> From: bodewig@apache.org
> To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:35:25 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
>
> On 2012-01-25, Michael Herndon wrote:
>
> > Do we have a standard of copy or tag of Java's version source that we're
> > doing a compare against? I only see the 3_1 and above in the tags.
>
> Likely because the svn location has changed in between. I think it must
> be <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/>
>
> Stefan
Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
Posted by Christopher Currens <cu...@gmail.com>.
I was sick for a while, but I finally had time to check and see if the java
issues below were already ported or not. I can confirm that all of those
changes, if applicable, were already included in the 3.0.3 branch. When I
say if application, I mean issues like this one:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2653, haven't been ported
because there's no real equivalent in .NET. This one in particular deals
with a BreakIterator, which I deals with culture sensitive text boundaries.
There is not a .NET equivalent for that, as far as I know.
So, from what I can tell, it looks like the core assembly for 3.0.3 should
include all bug fixes and such from java. Contrib is largely there, as
well, but there are still a few libraries that haven't/can't easily be
ported.
On this subject, it looks like 2.9.4 was successfully voted for release.
Does this mean we are soon merging 3.0.3 into trunk? There are only a few
issues regarding .NET-ification that I think are blocking a 3.0.3 release.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Christopher Currens <
currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2653, 2055, 2776, 2732, 2688, 2616, 2524, 2398, 2284, 2278, 2277, and 2249
> are all on JIRA that aren't on that list in the CHANGES.txt file. It looks
> like that file in SVN has some issues that aren't listen in JIRA. Anyway,
> it's possible that those issues listed here have already been ported as
> part of that changeset. I'm basing that on the fact that the last time
> these bugs were updated was Dec 1st 2010, which was before the code was
> released. However, we should still check to make sure.
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Christopher Currens <
> currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I can only guarantee that these 31 bugs here (in the 3.0.3 version):
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/CHANGES.txt are
>> part of the code. I mean, it's possible that other's are, but we'd really
>> need to check the others listed there to be sure that they are also
>> included. However, that's only a difference of 9 bugs, so I think we're
>> very close to a 3.0.3 release, depending on how many issues we want to get
>> done that related to changing the API.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Christopher
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So, Chris if you did this as a direct port of the java version (
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/), Does
>>> that mean that all of the LUCENE JIRA issues (
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+LUCENE+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide)
>>> are part of this code already? That would make 3.0.3 well on it's way to
>>> release... ~P
>>> > From: bodewig@apache.org
>>> > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> > Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:35:25 +0100
>>> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
>>> >
>>> > On 2012-01-25, Michael Herndon wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Do we have a standard of copy or tag of Java's version source that
>>> we're
>>> > > doing a compare against? I only see the 3_1 and above in the tags.
>>> >
>>> > Likely because the svn location has changed in between. I think it
>>> must
>>> > be <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/>
>>> >
>>> > Stefan
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
Posted by Christopher Currens <cu...@gmail.com>.
2653, 2055, 2776, 2732, 2688, 2616, 2524, 2398, 2284, 2278, 2277, and 2249
are all on JIRA that aren't on that list in the CHANGES.txt file. It looks
like that file in SVN has some issues that aren't listen in JIRA. Anyway,
it's possible that those issues listed here have already been ported as
part of that changeset. I'm basing that on the fact that the last time
these bugs were updated was Dec 1st 2010, which was before the code was
released. However, we should still check to make sure.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Christopher Currens <
currens.chris@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can only guarantee that these 31 bugs here (in the 3.0.3 version):
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/CHANGES.txt are
> part of the code. I mean, it's possible that other's are, but we'd really
> need to check the others listed there to be sure that they are also
> included. However, that's only a difference of 9 bugs, so I think we're
> very close to a 3.0.3 release, depending on how many issues we want to get
> done that related to changing the API.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> So, Chris if you did this as a direct port of the java version (
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/), Does
>> that mean that all of the LUCENE JIRA issues (
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+LUCENE+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide)
>> are part of this code already? That would make 3.0.3 well on it's way to
>> release... ~P
>> > From: bodewig@apache.org
>> > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:35:25 +0100
>> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
>> >
>> > On 2012-01-25, Michael Herndon wrote:
>> >
>> > > Do we have a standard of copy or tag of Java's version source that
>> we're
>> > > doing a compare against? I only see the 3_1 and above in the tags.
>> >
>> > Likely because the svn location has changed in between. I think it must
>> > be <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/>
>> >
>> > Stefan
>>
>>
>
>
Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
Posted by Christopher Currens <cu...@gmail.com>.
I can only guarantee that these 31 bugs here (in the 3.0.3 version):
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/CHANGES.txt are
part of the code. I mean, it's possible that other's are, but we'd really
need to check the others listed there to be sure that they are also
included. However, that's only a difference of 9 bugs, so I think we're
very close to a 3.0.3 release, depending on how many issues we want to get
done that related to changing the API.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Prescott Nasser <ge...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
> So, Chris if you did this as a direct port of the java version (
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/), Does
> that mean that all of the LUCENE JIRA issues (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+LUCENE+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%223.0.3%22+AND+status+%3D+Closed+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide)
> are part of this code already? That would make 3.0.3 well on it's way to
> release... ~P
> > From: bodewig@apache.org
> > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:35:25 +0100
> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] 3.0.3
> >
> > On 2012-01-25, Michael Herndon wrote:
> >
> > > Do we have a standard of copy or tag of Java's version source that
> we're
> > > doing a compare against? I only see the 3_1 and above in the tags.
> >
> > Likely because the svn location has changed in between. I think it must
> > be <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_3_0_3/>
> >
> > Stefan
>
>