You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-dev@lucene.apache.org by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org> on 2007/05/29 20:27:44 UTC

Re: svn commit: r542461 - in /lucene/solr/trunk/src/java/org/apache/solr: schema/IndexSchema.java update/DirectUpdateHandler.java update/UpdateHandler.java

: Now, the only status codes set in SolrExceptions are valid HTTP status codes:
:  500
:  400
:  503
:  404

should we deprecate the current SolrException constructor and add one that
uses an enumeration of legal HTTP status codes ... that way we can
eventually eliminate the current usage of "int" and get compile time
assurances that we only generate legal HTTP status codes.



-Hoss


Re: svn commit: r542461 - in /lucene/solr/trunk/src/java/org/apache/solr: schema/IndexSchema.java update/DirectUpdateHandler.java update/UpdateHandler.java

Posted by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>.
: > should we deprecate the current SolrException constructor and add one that
: > uses an enumeration of legal HTTP status codes ... that way we can
: > eventually eliminate the current usage of "int" and get compile time
: > assurances that we only generate legal HTTP status codes.
: >
:
: I like that... but i'd like to see solr1.2 out first ;)

i was just thinking it might be good to get the deprecations in 1.2 so
it's easier to delete the current one in the "next" release.



-Hoss


Re: svn commit: r542461 - in /lucene/solr/trunk/src/java/org/apache/solr: schema/IndexSchema.java update/DirectUpdateHandler.java update/UpdateHandler.java

Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
Chris Hostetter wrote:
> : Now, the only status codes set in SolrExceptions are valid HTTP status codes:
> :  500
> :  400
> :  503
> :  404
> 
> should we deprecate the current SolrException constructor and add one that
> uses an enumeration of legal HTTP status codes ... that way we can
> eventually eliminate the current usage of "int" and get compile time
> assurances that we only generate legal HTTP status codes.
> 

I like that... but i'd like to see solr1.2 out first ;)